What a third-rate incompetent little country we have become.
Utterly ridiculous. I have never seem an explaantion for that guidance terminology which is even slightly convincing. The police have been provided with countless examples of words they could use to make very clear allegations will be treated seriously without crossing the line like that, yet they persist in it. They don't accept any criticism.
I think we know that in the past the authorities have been guilty of dismissing allegations far too easily. But rather than insist that they investigate thoroughly all claims of sexual abuse, the policy has become to put together a case for prosecution even if the evidence isn't there.
If the police announced a change in policy, the Guardian would be running a story saying that the police won't believe rape victims, etc. etc.
From my header - “ “Any process that imposes an artificial state of mind upon an investigator is, necessarily, a flawed process. An investigator, in any reputable system of justice, must be impartial. The imposed ‘obligation to believe’ removes that impartiality.”
If the police allow sentimental beliefs, preconceived opinions and assumptions, pressure from the media or politicians to override the judgments they need to make, they are doing a profound disservice – to the victims (who need their complaints taken seriously and investigated properly, a crucially important difference to simply being believed), to the defendants (who are entitled not to be accused publicly – or at all – on the basis of opinion unsupported by any evidence), to the public’s faith in policing, to the administration of justice itself.”
It's not rocket science, is it? That's why I thinking he’d by it is ideological.
Too much thinking by those in public life is infected by a sort of ideological sentimentality, an assumption that feelings - and how strong they are - however ridiculous and however outweighed by other factors - should be the only or main determinant of policy.
What a third-rate incompetent little country we have become.
Utterly ridiculous. I have never seem an explaantion for that guidance terminology which is even slightly convincing. The police have been provided with countless examples of words they could use to make very clear allegations will be treated seriously without crossing the line like that, yet they persist in it. They don't accept any criticism.
I think we know that in the past the authorities have been guilty of dismissing allegations far too easily. But rather than insist that they investigate thoroughly all claims of sexual abuse, the policy has become to put together a case for prosecution even if the evidence isn't there.
If the police announced a change in policy, the Guardian would be running a story saying that the police won't believe rape victims, etc. etc.
From my header - “ “Any process that imposes an artificial state of mind upon an investigator is, necessarily, a flawed process. An investigator, in any reputable system of justice, must be impartial. The imposed ‘obligation to believe’ removes that impartiality.”
If the police allow sentimental beliefs, preconceived opinions and assumptions, pressure from the media or politicians to override the judgments they need to make, they are doing a profound disservice – to the victims (who need their complaints taken seriously and investigated properly, a crucially important difference to simply being believed), to the defendants (who are entitled not to be accused publicly – or at all – on the basis of opinion unsupported by any evidence), to the public’s faith in policing, to the administration of justice itself.”
It's not rocket science, is it? That's why I thinking he’d by it is ideological.
Too much thinking by those in public life is infected by a sort of ideological sentimentality, an assumption that feelings - and how strong they are - however ridiculous and however outweighed by other factors - should be the only or main determinant of policy.
We are forgetting how to think and reason.
It is groupthink. It's the sort of thing that has been actively fostered in public life since the Blair years. It will take a long time to filter out - it won't just be overturned by people 'coming to their senses'.
Personally I would ask everyone applying for a leading position in public life the interview question 'Can you tell us about a time you made a calculated departure from accepted norms to secure a great outcome for the public.'. We need to switch from a 'groupthinkers only' recruitment strategy to an 'independent thinkers only' one.
"The Attorney General of New York took action today to dissolve the National Rifle Association, following an 18-month investigation that found evidence the powerful gun rights group is "fraught with fraud and abuse."
Attorney General Letitia James claims in a lawsuit filed Thursday that she found financial misconduct in the millions of dollars, and that it contributed to a loss of more than $64 million over a three year period."
I don't get what some of you are saying. Are they supposed to say "Oh but it's an election year and we don't want to give Trump something he can use so let's just drop it and pretend nothing happened"?
Yes, probably.
This is a totemic issue. And anyway if there's been misconduct why not bring charges against the individuals, rather than trying to disband the organisation?
Under NY State law, organizations incorporated with the state have significant legal obligations. Removals of charters is sanction for misbehavior.
NRA could (and likely will) incorporate in a more obliging state. BUT until that happens, they are bound to follow the law NOT flout it.
What does the 64 mill loss mean? Who lost it and where did it go?
"The Attorney General of New York took action today to dissolve the National Rifle Association, following an 18-month investigation that found evidence the powerful gun rights group is "fraught with fraud and abuse."
Attorney General Letitia James claims in a lawsuit filed Thursday that she found financial misconduct in the millions of dollars, and that it contributed to a loss of more than $64 million over a three year period."
I don't get what some of you are saying. Are they supposed to say "Oh but it's an election year and we don't want to give Trump something he can use so let's just drop it and pretend nothing happened"?
Yes, probably.
This is a totemic issue. And anyway if there's been misconduct why not bring charges against the individuals, rather than trying to disband the organisation?
Under NY State law, organizations incorporated with the state have significant legal obligations. Removals of charters is sanction for misbehavior.
NRA could (and likely will) incorporate in a more obliging state. BUT until that happens, they are bound to follow the law NOT flout it.
America is a strange country. For a country that is allegedly pro-business and private individuals it's amazing how entwined the state is in things like organizations and voting in internal party elections.
What a third-rate incompetent little country we have become.
Utterly ridiculous. I have never seem an explaantion for that guidance terminology which is even slightly convincing. The police have been provided with countless examples of words they could use to make very clear allegations will be treated seriously without crossing the line like that, yet they persist in it. They don't accept any criticism.
I think we know that in the past the authorities have been guilty of dismissing allegations far too easily. But rather than insist that they investigate thoroughly all claims of sexual abuse, the policy has become to put together a case for prosecution even if the evidence isn't there.
If the police announced a change in policy, the Guardian would be running a story saying that the police won't believe rape victims, etc. etc.
From my header - “ “Any process that imposes an artificial state of mind upon an investigator is, necessarily, a flawed process. An investigator, in any reputable system of justice, must be impartial. The imposed ‘obligation to believe’ removes that impartiality.”
If the police allow sentimental beliefs, preconceived opinions and assumptions, pressure from the media or politicians to override the judgments they need to make, they are doing a profound disservice – to the victims (who need their complaints taken seriously and investigated properly, a crucially important difference to simply being believed), to the defendants (who are entitled not to be accused publicly – or at all – on the basis of opinion unsupported by any evidence), to the public’s faith in policing, to the administration of justice itself.”
It's not rocket science, is it? That's why I thinking he’d by it is ideological.
Too much thinking by those in public life is infected by a sort of ideological sentimentality, an assumption that feelings - and how strong they are - however ridiculous and however outweighed by other factors - should be the only or main determinant of policy.
We are forgetting how to think and reason.
Investigation as therapy.
= a bad investigation.
Regretfully I don't know that investigatory standards are the key driver for the authorities.
Sometimes I feel like I'm a bit harsh on this subject, but there's some pretty basic principles that seem obvious to apply in such cases and their being so basic yet not followed or even outright repudiated drives me to frustration and anger.
I don't investigate myself, though I have occasion to read investigation reports sometimes thankfully on far pettier matters, and it can be striking how even those pettier ones can be more rigorous. But then I remember that that is part of the point, to make the more serious matter easier.
... halfway down the line, He don't wanna get there, but he needs time He ain't sophisticated, nor well-educated After all the hours he wasted, still he needs time.
"The Attorney General of New York took action today to dissolve the National Rifle Association, following an 18-month investigation that found evidence the powerful gun rights group is "fraught with fraud and abuse."
Attorney General Letitia James claims in a lawsuit filed Thursday that she found financial misconduct in the millions of dollars, and that it contributed to a loss of more than $64 million over a three year period."
I don't get what some of you are saying. Are they supposed to say "Oh but it's an election year and we don't want to give Trump something he can use so let's just drop it and pretend nothing happened"?
Yes, probably.
This is a totemic issue. And anyway if there's been misconduct why not bring charges against the individuals, rather than trying to disband the organisation?
Under NY State law, organizations incorporated with the state have significant legal obligations. Removals of charters is sanction for misbehavior.
NRA could (and likely will) incorporate in a more obliging state. BUT until that happens, they are bound to follow the law NOT flout it.
What does the 64 mill loss mean? Who lost it and where did it go?
There are a lot of stories about the senior management (and board) of the NRA using the organisation's resources for their own personal benefit. I don't know how true they are, but the stories suggest a culture where there were few checks and balances and money could be spent at will.
"The Attorney General of New York took action today to dissolve the National Rifle Association, following an 18-month investigation that found evidence the powerful gun rights group is "fraught with fraud and abuse."
Attorney General Letitia James claims in a lawsuit filed Thursday that she found financial misconduct in the millions of dollars, and that it contributed to a loss of more than $64 million over a three year period."
I don't get what some of you are saying. Are they supposed to say "Oh but it's an election year and we don't want to give Trump something he can use so let's just drop it and pretend nothing happened"?
Yes, probably.
This is a totemic issue. And anyway if there's been misconduct why not bring charges against the individuals, rather than trying to disband the organisation?
Under NY State law, organizations incorporated with the state have significant legal obligations. Removals of charters is sanction for misbehavior.
NRA could (and likely will) incorporate in a more obliging state. BUT until that happens, they are bound to follow the law NOT flout it.
What does the 64 mill loss mean? Who lost it and where did it go?
There are a lot of stories about the senior management (and board) of the NRA using the organisation's resources for their own personal benefit. I don't know how true they are, but the stories suggest a culture where there were few checks and balances and money could be spent at will.
In many ways, it remind me of War on Want.
When Ollie North steps down as your President because things seem a bit too corrupt that is probably a canary in the coal mine moment.
I had forgot this was all being openly talked about in April last year.
They are funded to snoop. Why can't track and trace be put squarely in their lap?
-It would be a publicity win for the spooks -It makes the most of a national asset we've spent vast amounts on -Hopefully they'd do a good job - they'd certainly have a vested interest in doing so
Because, I dunno, may be they are busy with Russia, China and the Islamist terrorists?
Are you sure? Almost no one has commented since you posted this
They just don't realise they're fixed yet
Wasn't all that easy, having turned my computer off overnight, to sign on this morning. Password wasn't 'remembered' and it couldn't send me an email to reset. Had to find my password in my own store.
They are funded to snoop. Why can't track and trace be put squarely in their lap?
-It would be a publicity win for the spooks -It makes the most of a national asset we've spent vast amounts on -Hopefully they'd do a good job - they'd certainly have a vested interest in doing so
Because, I dunno, may be they are busy with Russia, China and the Islamist terrorists?
Maybe they are just crap and a complete waste of money
Spanish government confirms no EU veto for an independent Scotland The Spanish government has clarified that if Scotland becomes an independent state, it will not have to "wait in line" to become a full member of the European Union, nor would Spain veto its membership application.
In a letter obtained from the newspaper 'The National', Spanish Consul General in Edinburgh, Miguel Angel Vecino Quintana confirms that Spain "will not block Scotland's entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved."
Spanish government confirms no EU veto for an independent Scotland The Spanish government has clarified that if Scotland becomes an independent state, it will not have to "wait in line" to become a full member of the European Union, nor would Spain veto its membership application.
In a letter obtained from the newspaper 'The National', Spanish Consul General in Edinburgh, Miguel Angel Vecino Quintana confirms that Spain "will not block Scotland's entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved."
Malc, why have you just posted a story that’s over a year old and had a second act?
Spanish government confirms no EU veto for an independent Scotland The Spanish government has clarified that if Scotland becomes an independent state, it will not have to "wait in line" to become a full member of the European Union, nor would Spain veto its membership application.
In a letter obtained from the newspaper 'The National', Spanish Consul General in Edinburgh, Miguel Angel Vecino Quintana confirms that Spain "will not block Scotland's entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved."
Malc, why have you just posted a story that’s over a year old and had a second act?
Just because I wanted to and it is an update from the Spanish government. We get plenty of crap on here about past Tory victories, do you ever question the fact that they constantly harp back to past glories??
Spanish government confirms no EU veto for an independent Scotland The Spanish government has clarified that if Scotland becomes an independent state, it will not have to "wait in line" to become a full member of the European Union, nor would Spain veto its membership application.
In a letter obtained from the newspaper 'The National', Spanish Consul General in Edinburgh, Miguel Angel Vecino Quintana confirms that Spain "will not block Scotland's entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved."
Malc, why have you just posted a story that’s over a year old and had a second act?
Just because I wanted to and it is an update from the Spanish government. We get plenty of crap on here about past Tory victories, do you ever question the fact that they constantly harp back to past glories??
Yes.
And I don’t see any update. The update was they sacked their consul.
Comments
Fair Isle is the place you really want.
Personally I would ask everyone applying for a leading position in public life the interview question 'Can you tell us about a time you made a calculated departure from accepted norms to secure a great outcome for the public.'. We need to switch from a 'groupthinkers only' recruitment strategy to an 'independent thinkers only' one.
Sometimes I feel like I'm a bit harsh on this subject, but there's some pretty basic principles that seem obvious to apply in such cases and their being so basic yet not followed or even outright repudiated drives me to frustration and anger.
I don't investigate myself, though I have occasion to read investigation reports sometimes thankfully on far pettier matters, and it can be striking how even those pettier ones can be more rigorous. But then I remember that that is part of the point, to make the more serious matter easier.
Login issues fixed
He don't wanna get there, but he needs time
He ain't sophisticated, nor well-educated
After all the hours he wasted, still he needs time.
In many ways, it remind me of War on Want.
I had forgot this was all being openly talked about in April last year.
We are now VF
Ventricular Fibrillation?
Vegan Freaks?
Vanity Fair?
Characteristics of all of the above?
The Beeb has hired 800 agents and set up new call centres to collect the fee and deal with queries."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12326581/oaps-tv-licence-bill-bailiffs/
"Biden: Unlike The African-American Community, The Latino Community Is An Incredibly Diverse Community"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/08/06/biden_unlike_the_african-american_community_the_latino_community_is_an_incredibly_diverse_community.html
https://twitter.com/joebiden/status/1291540507416559617?s=21
Looks at bus.
Looks at Swinney.
Looks at bus again.
Hurls Swinney under it with great force.
https://www.tes.com/news/i-could-have-joined-sqa-protest-admits-sturgeon
Although the more alarming news is that OFQUAL has also used the same inappropriate and inaccurate algorithm to calculate its results.
This is going to be the nastiest of nasty train wrecks.
The Spanish government has clarified that if Scotland becomes an independent state, it will not have to "wait in line" to become a full member of the European Union, nor would Spain veto its membership application.
In a letter obtained from the newspaper 'The National', Spanish Consul General in Edinburgh, Miguel Angel Vecino Quintana confirms that Spain "will not block Scotland's entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved."
https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-fires-diplomat-in-scotland-over-eu-membership-letter/
Oh - and
new thread
And I don’t see any update. The update was they sacked their consul.