politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Results : October 16th 2014

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Results : October 16th 2014

Harper Green on Bolton (Lab Defence)
Result: Labour 1,176 (51% -1%), UKIP 777 (33% +15%), Conservative 282 (12% -11%), Greens 38 (2% -2%), Liberal Democrats 28 (1% -3%), Independent 19 (1%)
Labour HOLD with a majority of 399 (18%) on a swing of 8% from Labour to UKIP

Read the full story here

Ishmael_X

What happened in West Thurrock?

Artist

Good result for UKIP in Kent, they'll be hoping for the same in a months time.

MikeK

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

nigel4england

MikeK said:

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

Best wishes mate

Itajai

Rossendale does not look like a great result for Labour. Swing since what year?

MarkHopkins

New Conservative EU referendum bill clears first hurdle

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29656489

Fenman

UKIP will be very disappointed with the Medworth result. if they can't win Wisbech wards they cannot win the constituency of NE Cambs.

Eastwinger

Itajai said:

Rossendale does not look like a great result for Labour. Swing since what year?

This year.

UKIP 23% from standing start

Con -13%
Lab -10%

Tim_B

The Ebola scare has now got to the point that the New York football Giants have received an official Ebola briefing, as they play the Cowboys in Dallas on Sunday.

No_Offence_Alan

Ishmael_X said:

What happened in West Thurrock?

A small measure of anti-UKIP tactical voting?

MonikerDiCanio

UKIP's crushing performance in Sheppey should bode well for nearby R & S.

edmundintokyo

So what's the story with UKIP in Thurrock?

I'm not saying this is happening, but when you've got a minor party finally getting traction after years in the wilderness the standard course of action is to take the opportunity to enjoy some kind of bitter, personal internal factional schism...

Tapestry

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

bigjohnowls

http://electionsetc.com/2014/10/17/forecast-update-17-october-2014/


http://electionforecast.co.uk/

Remarkably similar models both have LAB biggest party but well short of a majority

edmundintokyo

No_Offence_Alan said:

Ishmael_X said:

What happened in West Thurrock?

A small measure of anti-UKIP tactical voting?

When was it last fought, and was there a LibDem candidate?

Eastwinger

bigjohnowls said:

http://electionsetc.com/2014/10/17/forecast-update-17-october-2014/


http://electionforecast.co.uk/

Remarkably similar models both have LAB biggest party but well short of a majority

Hung Parliament looks a racing certainty barring "events, dear boy".

stodge

Evening all

As Harry seems to have neglected the percentage changes for Tudor for some reason, let me offer them. The change since May this year is as follows:

CON -8%
LD +6%
LAB -5%
UKIP +5%
Green +1%

I make that a 7% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat so a fair result for the LDs. To my knowledge, the LDs have never won the Tudor Ward. Even during years like 1994 and 2002 when the Party took control of Kingston LB, the Conservatives always held Tudor so it was a seat the Tories ought to hold comfortably.

Ed Davey undoubtedly faces a huge challenge next May but this result will offer some grounds for optimism - that said, I suspect IF he holds the seat, his majority will be much nearer his 1997 number than his 2001 number.

UKIP won't be too disappointed with their result either - they polled 10% in the Beckton by-election as well so a long way from some of the more spectacular by-election scores elsewhere.

OldKingCole

MikeK said:

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

Oh dear, not a comfortable time. Wish you well.

Eastwinger

stodge said:

Evening all

As Harry seems to have neglected the percentage changes for Tudor for some reason, let me offer them. The change since May this year is as follows:

CON -8%
LD +6%
LAB -5%
UKIP +5%
Green +1%

I make that a 7% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat so a fair result for the LDs. To my knowledge, the LDs have never won the Tudor Ward. Even during years like 1994 and 2002 when the Party took control of Kingston LB, the Conservatives always held Tudor so it was a seat the Tories ought to hold comfortably.

Ed Davey undoubtedly faces a huge challenge next May but this result will offer some grounds for optimism - that said, I suspect IF he holds the seat, his majority will be much nearer his 1997 number than his 2001 number.

UKIP won't be too disappointed with their result either - they polled 10% in the Beckton by-election as well so a long way from some of the more spectacular by-election scores elsewhere.

Looks like it was a 3 member seat in May when all three Conservatives topped the polls. The big 3 fielded 3 each with Ukip and Green 1 each.

If you take the highest votes for each party last time the changes are

Con No Change
LibDem +10
Lab -2
Ukip -1
Green -7

HarryHayfield

In answer to Stodge's comment, I can only do multi member ward vote shares if the council in question has been loaded into UK-Elect (which by the way is now in it's 9th incarnation since it launched back in 1996). If members who live in multi member ward council areas are able to create UK-Elect election files for those council areas then I will be able to do the change as a regular basis (as a lot of the data is compiled by myself and the creator of the programme on a purely voluntary basis)

Eastwinger

All very neatly done on this site.
http://www.englishelections.org.uk/england/lby/london/tudor.php

TGOHF

MarkHopkins said:

New Conservative EU referendum bill clears first hurdle

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29656489

Which way did Carswell vote - wait he supported the refendum ? Disobeying Kipper high command already ?

TheWatcher

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

Richard_Tyndall

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

ZenPagan

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

all belief is potentially dangerous

manofkent2014

MarkHopkins said:

New Conservative EU referendum bill clears first hurdle

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29656489

Although some Labour MPs spoke out against Mr Neil's referendum bill during Friday's four hour debate, no votes were recorded against it as 283 MPs voted in favour.

Look at that. Not one person voted against it. Not one. So what's the problem been these last 40 years?

Has Westminster ever perpetrated such a low-life piece of fakery?

rcs1000

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

rcs1000

manofkent2014 said:

MarkHopkins said:

New Conservative EU referendum bill clears first hurdle

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29656489

Although some Labour MPs spoke out against Mr Neil's referendum bill during Friday's four hour debate, no votes were recorded against it as 283 MPs voted in favour.

Look at that. Not one person voted against it. Not one. So what's the problem been these last 40 years?

Has Westminster ever perpetrated such a low-life piece of fakery?

If we were outside the EU would UKIP be campaigning for regular votes on rejoining 'so the people's voice could be heard'?

No. People who support the status quo, rightly or wrongly, prefer not to have a referendum, because that keeps things the way they are. Just as UKIP, if we were outside the EU, would not demand a referendum on membership.

rcs1000

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

ZenPagan

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

Tim_B

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

I can see the headline now - Cows damage our DNA :-)

Roger

Tapestry identified the Martian space ship that planted the explosives at the base of the Twin Towers when others believed it was the result of two hi jacked airoplanes. He personally witnessed them arrive back on Planet Zog so I think he should be taken seriously

KentRising

Artist said:

Good result for UKIP in Kent, they'll be hoping for the same in a months time.

Kent will be fertile territory for UKIP next year, one feels (though there will be a lot of second places and tight thirds rather than many actual gains).

Tim_B

Just saw on TV - one of the more popular halloween costumes this year is an Ebola hazmat suit

Tim_B

Roger said:

Tapestry identified the Martian space ship that planted the explosives at the base of the Twin Towers when others believed it was the result of two hi jacked airoplanes. He personally witnessed them arrive back on Planet Zog so I think he should be taken seriously

What were the Martians doing on Zog? Is it a conspiracy? Where else have they been that we don't know about? Did they cause Ebola?

Andy_Cooke

ZenPagan said:

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

And it mutates our children into ninja turtles.
It all makes sense now. They're advocating for some sort of mass rubber bung rollout to halt the tide of bovine flatulant methane.

COWABUNGA!!!

isam

Newsnight discussing the government plans to try British jihadists with treason....

Tim_B

Andy_Cooke said:

ZenPagan said:

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

And it mutates our children into ninja turtles.
It all makes sense now. They're advocating for some sort of mass rubber bung rollout to halt the tide of bovine flatulant methane.

COWABUNGA!!!

Reminds me of an old schoolboy joke (although it only works when spoken) -

Q. What's brown and comes out of the back of Cowes?

A The Isle of Wight ferry

rcs1000

isam said:

Newsnight discussing the government plans to try British jihadists with treason....

If British troops are fighting ISIS, then fighting for ISIS would - one would have thought - fall under the heading off treason.

Tim_B

isam said:

Newsnight discussing the government plans to try British jihadists with treason....

The beeb said this was under a law dating back to the 1350s.

DavidBrackenbury

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

DavidBrackenbury

Tim_B said:

isam said:

Newsnight discussing the government plans to try British jihadists with treason....

The beeb said this was under a law dating back to the 1350s.

Yes. That was the law that hanged Sir Roger Casement.

rcs1000

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

foxinsoxuk

Tim_B said:

Andy_Cooke said:

ZenPagan said:

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

And it mutates our children into ninja turtles.
It all makes sense now. They're advocating for some sort of mass rubber bung rollout to halt the tide of bovine flatulant methane.

COWABUNGA!!!

Reminds me of an old schoolboy joke (although it only works when spoken) -

Q. What's brown and comes out of the back of Cowes?

A The Isle of Wight ferry

Point of Order! The Cowes ferry is coloured red.

Tim_B

foxinsoxuk said:

Tim_B said:

Andy_Cooke said:

ZenPagan said:

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

And it mutates our children into ninja turtles.
It all makes sense now. They're advocating for some sort of mass rubber bung rollout to halt the tide of bovine flatulant methane.

COWABUNGA!!!

Reminds me of an old schoolboy joke (although it only works when spoken) -

Q. What's brown and comes out of the back of Cowes?

A The Isle of Wight ferry

Point of Order! The Cowes ferry is coloured red.

Aw c'mon - how many schoolkids would know that, or care.... :-)

Doesn't look like it goes to Cowes either. Bugger

DavidBrackenbury

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

foxinsoxuk

MikeK said:

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

Best wishes.

Tim_B

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

foxinsoxuk

Tim_B said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Tim_B said:

Andy_Cooke said:

ZenPagan said:

rcs1000 said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Just to add: He didn't actually posit the authorities hiding something, merely IIRC, that the escaped methane is damaging our DNA.

Is he agitating for controls on farting cows then? They put an incredible amount of methane out per day

And it mutates our children into ninja turtles.
It all makes sense now. They're advocating for some sort of mass rubber bung rollout to halt the tide of bovine flatulant methane.

COWABUNGA!!!

Reminds me of an old schoolboy joke (although it only works when spoken) -

Q. What's brown and comes out of the back of Cowes?

A The Isle of Wight ferry

Point of Order! The Cowes ferry is coloured red.

Aw c'mon - how many schoolkids would know that, or care.... :-)

Doesn't look like it goes to Cowes either. Bugger

RedJet hydrofoil goes from Cowes to Southampton, the vehicle ferry goes to East Cowes.

I highly recommend the Red Funnel cooked breakfast, you will not have to eat for a week.

Richard_Nabavi

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

isam

MikeK said:

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

Good luck... One day later I'll be 40... ugh

Tim_B

An interesting aspect to the US election.

Senate races in LA and GA are getting closer. In both states if nobody gets 50% of the vote then there is a runoff.

In LA the runoff is in early December. In GA the runoff is not until early January.

So it is entirely possible that control of the Senate could be undecided until 2 months after the November election.

Should that happen you can imagine what the 2 months will be like here. It will be a bloodbath of biblical proportions.

Tim_B

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

corporeal

Tim_B said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

All potential entrants must prepare and drink a cup of tea to an acceptable standard before entry.

Any caught throwing it into any harbours to be clapped in irons.

DavidBrackenbury

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Gaius

Fenman said:

UKIP will be very disappointed with the Medworth result. if they can't win Wisbech wards they cannot win the constituency of NE Cambs.

Well, to be fair, its a big ask for UKIP to win NE cambs considering that the local tory has a majority of 16,000.

OTOH, it seems UKIP has a base of about 35% from which to grow, if they can.

Do you live in Wisbech?

weejonnie

corporeal said:

Tim_B said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

All potential entrants must prepare and drink a cup of tea to an acceptable standard before entry.

Any caught throwing it into any harbours to be clapped in irons.

As well as prepare and eat a Bacon Buttie

dugarbandier

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

That souds rather like you are recognizing ISIS as a state, and also legitimizing the criminals as soldiers.

Tim_B

corporeal said:

Tim_B said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

All potential entrants must prepare and drink a cup of tea to an acceptable standard before entry.

Any caught throwing it into any harbours to be clapped in irons.

I have the Taylors of Harrogate tea bags all ready for practicing!

RodCrosby

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

They were:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Haller_Cooper

corporeal

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

DavidBrackenbury

dugarbandier said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

That souds rather like you are recognizing ISIS as a state, and also legitimizing the criminals as soldiers.

No, not at all. I am recognising the criminals as traitors (as well as murderers) and ISIL is what it is, a self proclaimed faction with no legitimacy at all. That does not mean that those who throw their lot in with them are "soldiers". You don't have to be a soldier to commit treason...

JohnLilburne

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

My view is that people should be able to go to Syria to try to overthrow Assad. He's a c**t, a dictator who maintains his position by murdering and torturing his people. He can expect people to try to overthrow him by force. Doing so is not "terrorism", it is normal political discourse if you are a dictator. But as soon as you fight for the Queen's enemies, you are dead meat.

OblitusSumMe

Tim_B said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

A traitor and a coward. Quelle surprise. ;-)

Tim_B

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

But you do have to swear

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen

I wonder how many new Americans could define 'abjure'.

DavidBrackenbury

RodCrosby said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

They were:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Haller_Cooper

Interesting, although this was hardly a "normal" case. I wonder how many other such cases occurred. Very few, I think.

JohnLilburne

dugarbandier said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

That sounds rather like you are recognizing ISIS as a state, and also legitimizing the criminals as soldiers.

Why not recognise ISIS? We can then declare war on it and seek to destroy it utterly. Delenda est res publica islamica.

Let's face it, it is a sort of country.

Tim_B

OblitusSumMe said:

Tim_B said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Tim_B said:

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

I expect Mrs May will take a lenient view, given that we enjoy reasonably friendly relations with that other regime at the moment.

Think I'll send my wife first (who got her US passport last week) and if she doesn't get arrested and taken through Traitors Gate into the Tower, I'll follow.

A traitor and a coward. Quelle surprise. ;-)

You know me so well :-)

Sunil_Prasannan

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

JohnLilburne

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

Although they do have that overseas citizenship thingy for people of Indian descent.

Sunil_Prasannan

JohnLilburne said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

Although they do have that overseas citizenship thingy for people of Indian descent.

PIO card? I didn't bother!

JohnLilburne

corporeal said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

Because IRA terrorists committed crimes that were against the laws of the UK. IS jihadists mostly won't, as they are abroad, and the likelihood of being able to find them guilty of murder (a crime for which we claim extraterritoriality) is equally remote. Whereas a High Treason charge should be easier to make stick.

Tim_B

With reference to the occasional "what am I watching?" subject, I tried watching Blandings with Jennifer Saunders and Timothy Spall but really disliked it.

I am currently watching Alias Smith and Jones, the 1971 western series, and am really enjoying it. I remember it on BBC 2.

Next on my list is Sienfeld. I must be the only person in the world who has never seen an episode.

Tim_B

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

Norway has better trains :-)

corporeal

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

Because IRA terrorists committed crimes that were against the laws of the UK. IS jihadists mostly won't, as they are abroad, and the likelihood of being able to find them guilty of murder (a crime for which we claim extraterritoriality) is equally remote. Whereas a High Treason charge should be easier to make stick.

David Brackenbury was talking about the Lee Rigby killers.

RodCrosby

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Joyce, an American citizen, was convicted (stitched up) on the basis that he was in "possession" of the passport at the time he started working for the Germans, aided by the Labour government which had quietly changed the 1351 Act to fit his case. Lord Porter (dissenting) at the Court of Appeal House of Lords voted to quash the conviction on the (not unreasonable) grounds that whether or not Joyce was still in possession of the passport at the relevant time was a question for the jury...

Sunil_Prasannan

Tim_B said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

Norway has better trains :-)

How many are UNESCO world heritage railways?

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/944

JohnLilburne

corporeal said:

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

Because IRA terrorists committed crimes that were against the laws of the UK. IS jihadists mostly won't, as they are abroad, and the likelihood of being able to find them guilty of murder (a crime for which we claim extraterritoriality) is equally remote. Whereas a High Treason charge should be easier to make stick.

David Brackenbury was talking about the Lee Rigby killers.

He did, but then you and him went off on a more general discussion. As you say, there is little point charging someone who commits murder in the UK with treason, as the penalty for murder is the same.

Tim_B

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

India is a slightly bigger example!

Norway has better trains :-)

How many are UNESCO world heritage railways?

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/944

All built under the Raj. Only a low and cunning scoundrel would stoop to using UNESCO because he's jealous about dual citizenship and obsessed by trains :-)

Norway has NINE heritage railways.....so there!

Norway really DOES have better trains!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heritage_railways#Norway

JohnLilburne

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

RodCrosby said:

aided by the Labour government which had quietly changed the 1351 Act to fit his case

In what way?

MarkSenior

HarryHayfield said:

In answer to Stodge's comment, I can only do multi member ward vote shares if the council in question has been loaded into UK-Elect (which by the way is now in it's 9th incarnation since it launched back in 1996). If members who live in multi member ward council areas are able to create UK-Elect election files for those council areas then I will be able to do the change as a regular basis (as a lot of the data is compiled by myself and the creator of the programme on a purely voluntary basis)

Harry , you will pick up all the information on swings from middleenglander's weekly summaries on the Vote 2012 website

corporeal

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

Because IRA terrorists committed crimes that were against the laws of the UK. IS jihadists mostly won't, as they are abroad, and the likelihood of being able to find them guilty of murder (a crime for which we claim extraterritoriality) is equally remote. Whereas a High Treason charge should be easier to make stick.

David Brackenbury was talking about the Lee Rigby killers.

He did, but then you and him went off on a more general discussion. As you say, there is little point charging someone who commits murder in the UK with treason, as the penalty for murder is the same.

Erm, no we didn't? Or I didn't?

DavidBrackenbury

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

JohnLilburne said:

corporeal said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

If we didn't bother with it for the IRA (did we?), seems a bit odd to try and revive it now.

Because IRA terrorists committed crimes that were against the laws of the UK. IS jihadists mostly won't, as they are abroad, and the likelihood of being able to find them guilty of murder (a crime for which we claim extraterritoriality) is equally remote. Whereas a High Treason charge should be easier to make stick.

David Brackenbury was talking about the Lee Rigby killers.

He did, but then you and him went off on a more general discussion. As you say, there is little point charging someone who commits murder in the UK with treason, as the penalty for murder is the same.

The murderers of Lee Rigby are self proclaimed traitors, but they have been dealt with in any event. There are many others who may not be proved guilty of murder, who are traitors to the country of their citizenship and should be dealt with accordingly. If people wish to hold with ISIL, or any other enemy of the UK, then we should be able to act.

Socrates

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

But you do have to swear

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen

I wonder how many new Americans could define 'abjure'.

Renouncing your allegiance to the Queen is not exactly treason. There are plenty of UK republicans who never felt an allegiance in the first place!

Scott_P

@ftwestminster: Alexander to be LibDem shadow chancellor http://t.co/aixzK5m4qN

DavidBrackenbury

Mike, if you are still with us, good luck with your health issues. Wish you fully restored asap!

fitalass

I thought that had already been announced a week or two ago?

Scott_P said:

@ftwestminster: Alexander to be LibDem shadow chancellor http://t.co/aixzK5m4qN

fitalass

Wishing you all the best with your up coming operation, and hoping you have a speedy recovery.

MikeK said:

Thanks to all those PBers wishing me well. New date for my op is December 9th, this however depends on all the tests for my heart passing muster and my tachycardia being under control.

Tim_B

Socrates said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

But you do have to swear

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen

I wonder how many new Americans could define 'abjure'.

Renouncing your allegiance to the Queen is not exactly treason. There are plenty of UK republicans who never felt an allegiance in the first place!

I did it for business reasons - I was working at a nuclear weapons facility.

I did call the UK consulate in Atlanta and ask about it. They understood completely and said it was no problem. I'm quite surprised how many people I know here with dual citizenship.

RodCrosby

JohnLilburne said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

Only if one accepts mere possession of a piece of paper used for some incidental purpose should be enough to hang someone. Note that the question of possession was never even put to the jury. It was just assumed on the grounds that, administratively, passports were usually issued for a period of twelve months, although it was conceded they could be issued for shorter periods.

i) Joyce obtained a British passport (most likely unknowing he wasn't entitled to it). Legal, or at worst subject to a £2 fine if the facts had become known at the time.

ii) Joyce travelled to Germany in peacetime on the passport, and had no further use for it. Legal.

iii) Joyce, in reality never other than an American citizen, commenced working for the Germans. Legal.

iv) Joyce hanged for treason against the King of England, only after the law was changed to fit his case, and applied retrospectively.

Not our legal system's finest hour...

Floater

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheWatcher said:

Tapestry said:

How long before an independent anti-fracking candidate wins against the KipLabCon?
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/government-wakes-up-to-political-cost.html

As for ebola, it's a giant con
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/from-ghana-ebola-is-not-real-and-only.html

Nonsense like that, is a direct cause of the misery that Ebola victims suffer. You're an irresponsible crackpot.

You see the mistake I made was trying to argue about this stuff reasonably with Tapestry. In the end I have to say your approach is far easier and probably more honest. Tapestry has no interest in truth or science. Anything that disagrees with his warped world view is simply disregarded, ignored or ridiculed.

Like you say he is irresponsible and (I would add) dangerous

You need to remember that Tapestry genuinely believes that the people of Pennsylvania and Texas are having their DNA destroyed by fracc'ing, and that we face millions of births of disfigured children as a result. If there is no evidence for this, then it must be because the authorities are hiding something.

Tapestry really belongs on "above top secret. com"

Tim_B

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

Only if one accepts mere possession of a piece of paper used for some incidental purpose should be enough to hang someone. Note that the question of possession was never even put to the jury. It was just assumed on the grounds that, administratively, passports were usually issued for a period of twelve months, although it was conceded they could be issued for shorter periods.

i) Joyce obtained a British passport (most likely unknowing he wasn't entitled to it). Legal, or at worst subject to a £2 fine if the facts had become known at the time.

ii) Joyce travelled to Germany in peacetime on the passport, and had no further use for it. Legal.

iii) Joyce, in reality never other than an American citizen, commenced working for the Germans. Legal.

iv) Joyce hanged for treason against the King of England, only after the law was changed to fit his case, and applied retrospectively.

Not our legal system's finest hour...

Down there with Derek Bentley?

OblitusSumMe

DavidBrackenbury said:

Mike, if you are still with us, good luck with your health issues. Wish you fully restored asap!

Well, it didn't sound like he was that close to death to me. No need to suggest that he might have popped his clogs tonight.

Artist

Scott_P said:

@ftwestminster: Alexander to be LibDem shadow chancellor http://t.co/aixzK5m4qN

Going against what the majority of their members wanted, interesting.

DavidBrackenbury

OblitusSumMe said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Mike, if you are still with us, good luck with your health issues. Wish you fully restored asap!

Well, it didn't sound like he was that close to death to me. No need to suggest that he might have popped his clogs tonight.

Yes, I expressed myself badly. I suspect he may have gone to bed! As I will do soon. Good night all. Interesting discussions!

RodCrosby

JohnLilburne said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

RodCrosby said:

aided by the Labour government which had quietly changed the 1351 Act to fit his case

In what way?

The 1351 Act, recognizing that Treason was the most heinous crime, subject to the harshest penalties, had remained undisturbed in its requirement that two witnesses were required to a single act of treason (or one witness to two separate acts) in order to prove the charge.

In 1945, Labour, realising that the case against Joyce was thin, changed the 600 year old law so that one witness to one act would be sufficient.

The only evidence presented against Joyce was one copper, who claimed that, while scanning the bands of his wireless once in October 1939, he heard a voice he recognised (he had arrested Joyce in the 1930s at a BUF scuffle) broadcasting from Germany.

The change in the law, on this thin evidence, was then applied retrospectively to Joyce to convict him of treason (subject entirely to the question of the passport of course, discussed below).

Ninoinoz

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

Only if one accepts mere possession of a piece of paper used for some incidental purpose should be enough to hang someone. Note that the question of possession was never even put to the jury. It was just assumed on the grounds that, administratively, passports were usually issued for a period of twelve months, although it was conceded they could be issued for shorter periods.

i) Joyce obtained a British passport (most likely unknowing he wasn't entitled to it). Legal, or at worst subject to a £2 fine if the facts had become known at the time.

ii) Joyce travelled to Germany in peacetime on the passport, and had no further use for it. Legal.

iii) Joyce, in reality never other than an American citizen, commenced working for the Germans. Legal.

iv) Joyce hanged for treason against the King of England, only after the law was changed to fit his case, and applied retrospectively.

Not our legal system's finest hour...

And, you might add, didn't attack or betray any of the King's troops.

One problem with the case is that a foreign citizen, abroad and not attacking HM Forces, was found guilty of treason. This is an extraordinarily wide remit.

One thing you haven't answered is why wasn't he tried for treason by the USA?

RodCrosby

Ninoinoz said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

RodCrosby said:

JohnLilburne said:

Yes they are traitors. The 1351 Act is clear "adherance to the Queen's enemies". It was used to string up Joyce on the basis that he travelled on a British passport that he wasn't entitled to, but lied to obtain. Throw the book at them, I say.

Joyce travelling on a British passport was neither here or there. There is no evidence he "lied" to get it either, since no man can be a witness to the circumstances of his own birth, and citizenship is ultimately a question of law. He wrongly believed himself to be British is as much as one can say.

Whether he lied or was mistaken, he was claiming the protection of HM King George VI at the time he went to work for our enemy. Fair enough, I think.

Only if one accepts mere possession of a piece of paper used for some incidental purpose should be enough to hang someone. Note that the question of possession was never even put to the jury. It was just assumed on the grounds that, administratively, passports were usually issued for a period of twelve months, although it was conceded they could be issued for shorter periods.

i) Joyce obtained a British passport (most likely unknowing he wasn't entitled to it). Legal, or at worst subject to a £2 fine if the facts had become known at the time.

ii) Joyce travelled to Germany in peacetime on the passport, and had no further use for it. Legal.

iii) Joyce, in reality never other than an American citizen, commenced working for the Germans. Legal.

iv) Joyce hanged for treason against the King of England, only after the law was changed to fit his case, and applied retrospectively.

Not our legal system's finest hour...

And, you might add, didn't attack or betray any of the King's troops.

One problem with the case is that a foreign citizen, abroad and not attacking HM Forces, was found guilty of treason. This is an extraordinarily wide remit.

One thing you haven't answered is why wasn't he tried for treason by the USA?

Because at the relevant time Germany wasn't at war with the USA.

Before the US entered the war, Joyce had applied for and obtained German citizenship. Again, perfectly legal under US (and British) law...

Socrates

Tim_B said:

Socrates said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

Tim_B said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidBrackenbury said:

There was IIRC a petition asking for the two murderers of Lee Rigby to be tried for treason as well as murder. Seems sensible to me. If you completely reject our society and actively fight against it, then take what's coming...

Isn't that a bit like charging someone for assault as well as murder?

And surely we accept people who reject society until they commit a crime, whereupon they are guilty of the crime. And as a final point, do we want to glorify that murder by giving it some kind of political significance?

The whole point of the people who murdered Lee Rigby was that they were claiming that they were "soldiers" "at war with the UK" etc. etc. Yes, they committed and were jailed for the murder, which had political significance in their eyes. I take the point that it doesn't make a great deal of difference in their cases, but what do we do with UK Citizens, who fight against us, renounce their allegiance and throw in their lot with another regime. That, surely is the definition of treason?

What about folks with dual citizenship, like me? I've sworn allegiance to another regime. Still have my UK passport too though.

But while you may have dual citizenship, you have not (as far as I know!!) fought against either State that you are a Citizen of, renounced your allegiance to either State or claimed adherence to a third regime that is totally hostile to the first two. During WW2, there were sad cases of people with UK / German citizenship who had to make their minds up as to which side to cast their loyalty. They were not normally in danger of indictment for treason though.

Some countries - Norway for example - don't allow dual citizenship.

But you do have to swear

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen

I wonder how many new Americans could define 'abjure'.

Renouncing your allegiance to the Queen is not exactly treason. There are plenty of UK republicans who never felt an allegiance in the first place!

I did it for business reasons - I was working at a nuclear weapons facility.

I did call the UK consulate in Atlanta and ask about it. They understood completely and said it was no problem. I'm quite surprised how many people I know here with dual citizenship.

I'm just waiting for the first US presidential candidate with dual citizenship. People are going to freak out.

RodCrosby

Ninoinoz said:

And, you might add, didn't attack or betray any of the King's troops.

Indeed, Joyce was the first person in 300 years to be hanged for words alone.

PG Wodehouse, objectively not a dissimilar case, in comparison had his knighthood delayed instead...