Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
According to Virginia Department of Elections web page Hilary won Loudoun by 17% (55.1% to 38.2%). I'd hate to get excited about Biden winning by 10 points.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I agree, the evidence the EHRC needed wasn't there even though nearly all of us here can see the implications of the way Corbyn behaved when it came to handling antisemitism. It was dismissive of the concerns and it denied there was a problem, but it wasn't enough evidence for the EHRC to comment on. The way I see it going is that he'll end up getting kicked out for some silly comment anyway at some point.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I don't need to read the 130-page report - going from the media reports that:
The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
The report confirms there was antisemitism.
The report confirms there were laws broken.
Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
Ultimately it's politics. The police didn't do anything about Cummings. Doesn't mean keeping him was the right thing to do. Only time will tell for the Tories. The same applies for Starmer and Corbyn.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
Wow, Starmer is absolutely pathetic. Dave did very well with the expenses scandal from the opposition benches, party discipline is one thing an opposition leader has got complete control over. It made Dave look almost like a PM in waiting. Starmer is failing at this test.
Not accepting the report's findings ought to provide plenty cover for withdrawing the whip, surely ? I can almost accept Starmer not booting out Cornyn on air, but he's got at best 24 hours to do the right thing.
Starmer must think if he takes action against Corbyn he'll end up with a breakaway party taking 10% of the vote and ruining his chances of entering Downing Street.
I'm guessing you're glad you re-left the party today?
I would not characterise the reaction as pathetic. It could be argued that the leader just chopping people in reaction to a report is not the way to go. We are after all, talking about a problem, that was in part because the leadership got involved in handling complaints....
I would, personally, hand the report to a suitable commission in the party. Who would have the remit of implementing recommendations and recommending actions to be taken. Including against individuals.
I personally think Keir should have taken the risk of a Labour split and huge civil war and expelled Corbyn over this. There's plenty of time before the next election for likely by elections losses to demonstrate the dangers of vote splitting and for voters to come home to Labour.
I used to be pretty keen on GAAR but then when I was in the biz I trusted the UK Government(s) and thought it was the kind of thing they were likely to do well. I envisaged the setting up of a Commission with autocratic but benign powers, a small team of suitably qualified professionals, an appeals procedure and a process for clearances in advance. Works well in other countries, I thought; no reason why it wouldn't in the UK.
Now I look at Boris and the collection of mates he has rewarded with vital roles to which they are ill-suited. Imagine for example Dido Harding as head of the GAAR Commission.
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
Ultimately it's politics. The police didn't do anything about Cummings. Doesn't mean keeping him was the right thing to do. Only time will tell for the Tories. The same applies for Starmer and Corbyn.
Yes that is the best and fairest comment I have read.
Problem for Keir is that expelling Corbyn would be catastrophic for cohesion in the Labour Party.
There's 4 years until the election. If your leg is riddled with gangrene you can't say it's amputation would be catastrophic for the cohesion of your body. You have to chop it off.
Problem for Keir is that expelling Corbyn would be catastrophic for cohesion in the Labour Party.
There's 4 years until the election. If your leg is riddled with gangrene you can't say it's amputation would be catastrophic for the cohesion of your body. You have to chop it off.
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
Ultimately it's politics. The police didn't do anything about Cummings. Doesn't mean keeping him was the right thing to do. Only time will tell for the Tories. The same applies for Starmer and Corbyn.
Yes that is the best and fairest comment I have read.
I agree. It' a tricky one for Starmer. Corbyn (and pals) could make it easy for him by resigning, but they won't. I think he'll have to aim them out eventually, but he'll want to observe due process. Meanwhile he'll take a lot of flak for 'weakness' from political opponents who recognise his danger to them.
A couple of days ago Mike disclosed that he had backed Biden to be elected the next POTUS at odds with an implied probability of 67.1% on the basis that as he explained "My wager this evening was at 1.49 because it is highly likely that over the next few days is price will tighten and tighten .... " That was on Tuesday, today, Thursday, several bookies are offering odds of 1.55 for the same bet, therefore with an implied probability of 64.5% - still very likely therefore but nonetheless the wrong side of Biden having a two in three chance. Why are the betting markets having doubts on anything like this scale about Joe's prospects of success? I can think of only two possible reasons. Firstly that there is some disbelief in the polls, which wouldn't be too surprising giving the extent to which most succeeded in messing up four years ago. Secondly, as was the case four years ago, there is a significant "Shy Trump" element among the electorate amounting to perhaps 3 - 4 percentage points which, were this were to be the case, would make it a very much closer contest. Supporting this theory are the extraordinarily huge crowds which Trump is continuing to attract, without exception at every address he has delivered over recent days, whilst Biden has remained hunkered down and largely silent. As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
Third, there is a greater degree of uncertainty about the make up of the electorate - with so many new voters and COVID. I really think this is the biggest valid concern.
A couple of days ago Mike disclosed that he had backed Biden to be elected the next POTUS at odds with an implied probability of 67.1% on the basis that as he explained "My wager this evening was at 1.49 because it is highly likely that over the next few days is price will tighten and tighten .... " That was on Tuesday, today, Thursday, several bookies are offering odds of 1.55 for the same bet, therefore with an implied probability of 64.5% - still very likely therefore but nonetheless the wrong side of Biden having a two in three chance. Why are the betting markets having doubts on anything like this scale about Joe's prospects of success? I can think of only two possible reasons. Firstly that there is some disbelief in the polls, which wouldn't be too surprising giving the extent to which most succeeded in messing up four years ago. Secondly, as was the case four years ago, there is a significant "Shy Trump" element among the electorate amounting to perhaps 3 - 4 percentage points which, were this were to be the case, would make it a very much closer contest. Supporting this theory are the extraordinarily huge crowds which Trump is continuing to attract, without exception at every address he has delivered over recent days, whilst Biden has remained hunkered down and largely silent. As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
The next POTUS markets are completely out of kilter. Trump fans are convinced he can win despite all the evidence that he won't. Trump haters are scared that he'll win so are backing him as a hedge. This has led to a fantastic opportunity to make money. eg You can back Biden to win and his percentage vote to be between 46 and 52% guaranteeing a small profit and doubling up if he wins with less than 52 (quite likely). Freeroll!
“...the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media.”
Well, of course it was. That is politics. If you hand your opponents a weapon, don't be surprised when they wield it against you.
Yes. If he'd managed to do something about it then they would have needed to find something else to criticise him about. But he was either unwilling or unable to do so.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I don't need to read the 130-page report - going from the media reports that:
The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
The report confirms there was antisemitism.
The report confirms there were laws broken.
Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.
Yes but if it is in the main a political judgement surely the Loto office should intervene ? One the one hand you are arguing the last loto should have not and now the present one should.
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
Ultimately it's politics. The police didn't do anything about Cummings. Doesn't mean keeping him was the right thing to do. Only time will tell for the Tories. The same applies for Starmer and Corbyn.
Yes that is the best and fairest comment I have read.
I agree. It' a tricky one for Starmer. Corbyn (and pals) could make it easy for him by resigning, but they won't. I think he'll have to aim them out eventually, but he'll want to observe due process. Meanwhile he'll take a lot of flak for 'weakness' from political opponents who recognise his danger to them.
Ultimately it's politics, indeed.
Also, with the help with some usual suspects, it will soon descend in what about the Tories and Islamophobia, and then you the racist, no you the racist....
As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
Question: Why do you think that when media attention focuses on Trump this benefits him electorally? I'd argue that for the whole year Trump has done worse when he's been in the headlines and he's rightly, and unsuccessfully, tried to draw attention to Biden as a result.
Yes, "to know him is to love him"? - not really. The opposite for many.
Not accepting the report's findings ought to provide plenty cover for withdrawing the whip, surely ? I can almost accept Starmer not booting out Cornyn on air, but he's got at best 24 hours to do the right thing.
Agree with this. Starmer needs to boot Corbyn and he needs to to it in a way that maximises the appearance that Corbyn only has himself to blame. That should minimise the fracture to the Corbyn hardliners. Right now Starmer's either getting it wrong, or playing a high risk game for a few hours to let Corbyn hang himself. It's probably the former.
The number of patients in hospital with coronavirus in Wales has increased by nearly a quarter on last week.
Latest figures from NHS Wales show 1,110 Covid-19 patients are currently in hospital - which is more than 80% of the level at the pandemic's peak in April.
Despite how we know all of this is a lagging indicator, brave call to come out of the firebreak while this is going on.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
The problem, as I see it, is that "stirring up hatred" can mean different things to different people. Ask many Muslims around the world - they would say, yes, Charlie H does stir up hatred.
Part of the problem here is that Western world is largely post-religious - in the sense that people from times past would see it. Yes, plenty of people bothering God etc. But it isn't the core of our lives anymore. So we don't *get it*.
It is incredibly hard to understand the mindset - this is one where religion and life are tightly bound together. a perceived insult to religion isn't just someone saying some abstract thing. It is a vicious, hurtful, attack on your very being.
Try reading the *human* stories of the Reformation. People prepared to die by burning. Rational, thinking people doing so. Often, rational, thinking people doing the burning... Because their connection to their God was that important....
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
He can have people expelled for bringing the party into disrepute. "They're all shit" in the report doesn't mean that he can't remove them all individually because it didn't say "x,y,z are shit"
The law doesn't come into it. Hard for Corbyn to challenge his expulsion legally on "disrepute" grounds. The party has just been brought to its knees because of him.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
Given that one of the main criticisms of the EHRC report is that the Leader's Office interfered in the complaints process, I wouldn't have thought that it's a good idea for Starmer to ceremoniously expel Corbyn. I haven't read the full report yet, but if it shows that there are grounds for removal of the Whip and/or expulsion from the Party, then due process should be followed.
Yes, it's silly to respond to a criticism of LOTO interference in disciplinary issues by demanding that the LOTO interferes in disciplinary issues. It's also reductionist - the problem was not Corbyn (who is not criticised in the report, except in the general terms of a failure of leadership), except insofar as he failed to respond energetically enough and early enough, but a general failure of the complaints system, which is actually worse - one can't say it was the failings of one man but of the overall system.
The report only criticises two individuals by name (Livingstone and a local councillor) and focuses on process. Its recommendations highloight an incoherent and slow response to criticism, as well as interference in individual cases in 2016-18 by the LOTO office - it concedes that sometimes the interference had the effect of taking a more severe response, but rightly says it shouldn't have happened at all.
I think it's a fair report which should be accepted. It doesn't accuse either Corbyn or the party of institutional anti-semitism, as some of the critics hoped it would, but it does show a picture of an incoherent and sometimes shambolic complaints procedure subject to political intervention. That has to be addressed fully, without delay. The report notes that the issue is not restricted to Labour, and it would be reasonable to ask how that Conservative investigation into its alleged Islamophobia is getting on. Is it actually happening at all?
By the way, everyone should be on the side of liberal and secular France in standing up to islamic fundamentalist bullies and snowflakes.
What does that actually mean? First time we played La Marseillaise at the Proms but it is too late for that. Being "on the side of" France is like being on the side of BLM, good for the soul but falling short of actual help.
As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
Question: Why do you think that when media attention focuses on Trump this benefits him electorally? I'd argue that for the whole year Trump has done worse when he's been in the headlines and he's rightly, and unsuccessfully, tried to draw attention to Biden as a result.
Quite simply because it will convince Trump's would-be supporters that he actually wants the job more than does Joe Biden who is content to simply keep his head down and remain silent ... which is hardly an impressive strategy. Please understand, I'm not suggesting is a Trump victory a likely outcome, but merely trying to understand why the betting odds, rather strangely and contrary to Mike Smithson's reasonable supposition have been moving against Biden over recent days.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I don't need to read the 130-page report - going from the media reports that:
The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
The report confirms there was antisemitism.
The report confirms there were laws broken.
Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.
Yes but if it is in the main a political judgement surely the Loto office should intervene ? One the one hand you are arguing the last loto should have not and now the present one should.
Starmer has got to follow due process. Corbyn's given him a helping hand by not accepting the report in full.
I'm guessing you're glad you re-left the party today?
I would not characterise the reaction as pathetic. It could be argued that the leader just chopping people in reaction to a report is not the way to go. We are after all, talking about a problem, that was in part because the leadership got involved in handling complaints....
I would, personally, hand the report to a suitable commission in the party. Who would have the remit of implementing recommendations and recommending actions to be taken. Including against individuals.
Hear me out. What is pathetic is that the leader has DEFENDED the previous leader. Which will be quoted forever if the party now tries to take action against him.
Biggest projected swings to Biden (over 5%): New Hampshire, Tennessee, Kentucky, Maine 2nd, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, West Virginia, North Dakota, South Dakota.
Projected swings to Trump: California, D.C. Less than 2% projected swing to Biden: Illinois, Louisiana, Hawaii, Florida, Utah, Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi.
By the way, everyone should be on the side of liberal and secular France in standing up to islamic fundamentalist bullies and snowflakes.
What does that actually mean? First time we played La Marseillaise at the Proms but it is too late for that. Being "on the side of" France is like being on the side of BLM, good for the soul but falling short of actual help.
It doesn't "mean" anything. We can only ensure that we ourselves do not surrender to the bullies.
The whole world appears to be going to pot, and the weather is awful, but Jack's back — Jack W, not Nicklaus who appears to have been hit on the head by a golf ball — so at least some standards are being upheld.
SKS (who did not do very well at the press conference) needs to consider that Labour's Corbynite and left wing supporters have nowhere else remotely credible to go with their votes at election time, whereas the millions of the not very political Tory and LD voters he needs to switch to Labour can switch between Tory and LD and staying at home.
Corbyn may the the minimum offering required. And would be a Clause 4 moment for SKS, at which point a lot of non Labour people would take a second look, and ask if they might possibly prefer SKS to Dominic.
The other thing he could do is adopt a policy of applying to join EFTA.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
Given that one of the main criticisms of the EHRC report is that the Leader's Office interfered in the complaints process, I wouldn't have thought that it's a good idea for Starmer to ceremoniously expel Corbyn. I haven't read the full report yet, but if it shows that there are grounds for removal of the Whip and/or expulsion from the Party, then due process should be followed.
Yes, it's silly to respond to a criticism of LOTO interference in disciplinary issues by demanding that the LOTO interferes in disciplinary issues. It's also reductionist - the problem was not Corbyn (who is not criticised in the report, except in the general terms of a failure of leadership), except insofar as he failed to respond energetically enough and early enough, but a general failure of the complaints system, which is actually worse - one can't say it was the failings of one man but of the overall system.
The report only criticises two individuals by name (Livingstone and a local councillor) and focuses on process. Its recommendations highloight an incoherent and slow response to criticism, as well as interference in individual cases in 2016-18 by the LOTO office - it concedes that sometimes the interference had the effect of taking a more severe response, but rightly says it shouldn't have happened at all.
I think it's a fair report which should be accepted. It doesn't accuse either Corbyn or the party of institutional anti-semitism, as some of the critics hoped it would, but it does show a picture of an incoherent and sometimes shambolic complaints procedure subject to political intervention. That has to be addressed fully, without delay. The report notes that the issue is not restricted to Labour, and it would be reasonable to ask how that Conservative investigation into its alleged Islamophobia is getting on. Is it actually happening at all?
Nick - you and I both know that the rules permit people to be suspended from the Labour Party when something egregious happens. I called for the immediate suspension of the former leader and his cabal. He could have done that today. Instead what has he done? Defended them.
Many of the foreigners who entered Germany in those heady days are being forcibly sent home to Africa, south Asia, the Middle East, Russia and the Balkans on secret flights, marshalled by security officers, after being frogmarched to airports from their beds by armed police.
Others live in fear in migrant camps dotted throughout Germany. They know that any day a police posse could arrive, handcuff them, and drive them straight to a waiting plane destined for their home country. The Mail has discovered that hundreds who were afraid of being deported from Germany have fled to Calais where traffickers put them on boats or on lorries on ferries across the Channel.
Some 200,000 failed asylum seekers, illegal entrants, and foreigners convicted of crimes in their own countries or Germany are estimated to be listed for deportation flights. Many entered in 2015 when Mrs Merkel sent out her welcome message to refugees.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I don't need to read the 130-page report - going from the media reports that:
The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
The report confirms there was antisemitism.
The report confirms there were laws broken.
Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.
Yes but if it is in the main a political judgement surely the Loto office should intervene ? One the one hand you are arguing the last loto should have not and now the present one should.
Starmer has got to follow due process. Corbyn's given him a helping hand by not accepting the report in full.
Due process for anyone else - Suspend. Investigate. Report.
Many of the foreigners who entered Germany in those heady days are being forcibly sent home to Africa, south Asia, the Middle East, Russia and the Balkans on secret flights, marshalled by security officers, after being frogmarched to airports from their beds by armed police.
Others live in fear in migrant camps dotted throughout Germany. They know that any day a police posse could arrive, handcuff them, and drive them straight to a waiting plane destined for their home country. The Mail has discovered that hundreds who were afraid of being deported from Germany have fled to Calais where traffickers put them on boats or on lorries on ferries across the Channel.
Some 200,000 failed asylum seekers, illegal entrants, and foreigners convicted of crimes in their own countries or Germany are estimated to be listed for deportation flights. Many entered in 2015 when Mrs Merkel sent out her welcome message to refugees.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
The problem, as I see it, is that "stirring up hatred" can mean different things to different people. Ask many Muslims around the world - they would say, yes, Charlie H does stir up hatred.
Part of the problem here is that Western world is largely post-religious - in the sense that people from times past would see it. Yes, plenty of people bothering God etc. But it isn't the core of our lives anymore. So we don't *get it*.
It is incredibly hard to understand the mindset - this is one where religion and life are tightly bound together. a perceived insult to religion isn't just someone saying some abstract thing. It is a vicious, hurtful, attack on your very being.
Try reading the *human* stories of the Reformation. People prepared to die by burning. Rational, thinking people doing so. Often, rational, thinking people doing the burning... Because their connection to their God was that important....
Thank you. There is an issue here around taking the "victim's perception" as being too important, which is something that comes up, although as far as I can see it is only used to categorise potential crimes as potential hate crimes (i.e. does not change whether it was in fact a crime).
I would very be concerned if your example became prosecutable.
No it's not. It is pretty well a dead heat. One party is "nasty" for unacceptable anti-Semitism, that guilty verdict doesn't automatically make the other party "nice".
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
He can have people expelled for bringing the party into disrepute. "They're all shit" in the report doesn't mean that he can't remove them all individually because it didn't say "x,y,z are shit"
The law doesn't come into it. Hard for Corbyn to challenge his expulsion legally on "disrepute" grounds. The party has just been brought to its knees because of him.
The law does come into it , whatever you say.Especially if you are basing any decisions on the Equalities act 2010.
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
I don't need to read the 130-page report - going from the media reports that:
The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
The report confirms there was antisemitism.
The report confirms there were laws broken.
Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.
Yes but if it is in the main a political judgement surely the Loto office should intervene ? One the one hand you are arguing the last loto should have not and now the present one should.
No if he said he was asking for investigations and it was awaiting due process that would at least have kicked it into the grass. Suspending the whip pending an investigation is fair enough too.
He hasn't done either and he has actively defended Corbyn instead. 🤦🏻♂️
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
He can have people expelled for bringing the party into disrepute. "They're all shit" in the report doesn't mean that he can't remove them all individually because it didn't say "x,y,z are shit"
The law doesn't come into it. Hard for Corbyn to challenge his expulsion legally on "disrepute" grounds. The party has just been brought to its knees because of him.
The law does come into it , whatever you say.Especially if you are basing any decisions on the Equalities act 2010.
"Bringing the Party into Disrepute" is subjective not legal and objective.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
The problem, as I see it, is that "stirring up hatred" can mean different things to different people. Ask many Muslims around the world - they would say, yes, Charlie H does stir up hatred.
Part of the problem here is that Western world is largely post-religious - in the sense that people from times past would see it. Yes, plenty of people bothering God etc. But it isn't the core of our lives anymore. So we don't *get it*.
It is incredibly hard to understand the mindset - this is one where religion and life are tightly bound together. a perceived insult to religion isn't just someone saying some abstract thing. It is a vicious, hurtful, attack on your very being.
Try reading the *human* stories of the Reformation. People prepared to die by burning. Rational, thinking people doing so. Often, rational, thinking people doing the burning... Because their connection to their God was that important....
Thank you. There is an issue here around taking the "victim's perception" as being too important, which is something that comes up, although as far as I can see it is only used to categorise potential crimes as potential hate crimes (i.e. does not change whether it was in fact a crime).
I would very be concerned if your example became prosecutable.
The aim of the law is to protect the beliefs I describe - as far as I can tell.
It comes down to the issue - what is more important, freedom of speech, or not offending in a fundamental (ha) way, a minority group.
Starmer must think if he takes action against Corbyn he'll end up with a breakaway party taking 10% of the vote and ruining his chances of entering Downing Street.
Reckon Len has told him where the money goes in that scenario. The individual unions are too big for the good of the Labour Party - puts too much power into the hands of a couple of Union general secretaries.
"Since you have blamed all Muslims and the Muslims’ religion for what was done by one angry person, the Muslims have a right to punish the French. The boycott cannot compensate the wrongs committed by the French all these years."
That 3.3 day doubling time in London looks bad. Let's see what the ONS data says tomorrow.
London is empty so its hard to imagine an R rate that high
"London is empty"... Er what are you talking about? London has a population of over 9 million people! We are all still here.
I think thats the assumption that 'london' is the central tourist themepark.
London is one of those topics that people who know fuck all about it like to opine on here. Here's a suggestion - people who don't live in London and hate London, why don't you stop talking about London? Or at least stop taking our hard-earned money. One of the two.
Would be a mercy for all. Most PB Bumpkins seem to think London starts and ends a mile radius from Nelson's Column.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
The problem, as I see it, is that "stirring up hatred" can mean different things to different people. Ask many Muslims around the world - they would say, yes, Charlie H does stir up hatred.
Part of the problem here is that Western world is largely post-religious - in the sense that people from times past would see it. Yes, plenty of people bothering God etc. But it isn't the core of our lives anymore. So we don't *get it*.
It is incredibly hard to understand the mindset - this is one where religion and life are tightly bound together. a perceived insult to religion isn't just someone saying some abstract thing. It is a vicious, hurtful, attack on your very being.
Try reading the *human* stories of the Reformation. People prepared to die by burning. Rational, thinking people doing so. Often, rational, thinking people doing the burning... Because their connection to their God was that important....
Charlie H is offensive - indeed it's intended to be so. But in a secular democracy there is, and has to be a distinction between being offensive and stirring up hatred. And the right to do the first has to be defended. Charlie H is not to my taste - it seem to me crass and unamusing - but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be published.
I am not entirely comfortable with the state making a point of republishing its more offensive sallies, but in the face or terror, governments cannot back down.
The betting markets currently rate Biden's chance of winning Michigan as almost exactly the same as Trump's chance of winning Texas (odds of around 1.35 in both cases).
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
No it's not. It is pretty well a dead heat. One party is "nasty" for unacceptable anti-Semitism, that guilty verdict doesn't automatically make the other party "nice".
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
Jack, whilst it's good to see you back again, I think you're losing your touch somewhat ... first there's no lockdown in Derby affecting Rolls Royce. Second the R-R plant in question manufactures aero engines, not broomsticks.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
That's "lawyer's true" though, isn't it? It is literally the case that the report is on corporate failings of the Labour Party. However, the report is absolutely scathing about the Leader of the Opposition's Office (LOTO). Just as an example:
"Throughout the period we investigated, there was political interference in the handling of antisemitism complaints – as part of a wider practice of LOTO involvement in disciplinary cases that were deemed ‘politically sensitive’... We found that this political interference was not part of the Labour Party’s formal complaints process, so it was not a legitimate approach to determining complaints... We concluded that this was indirectly discriminatory and unlawful, and that the Labour Party was legally responsible for it."
Who was running the LOTO in this period?
It isn't the EHRC's role to finger individuals - it's role is to look at corporate failings. But as the body being criticised, as well as addressing the corporate failings, you do have to discipline individuals who are still part of the set-up in some way and who were involved in the key decisions.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
I have the new Rolls Royce Tandem Broomstick on order for Mrs Jack and I but for some time but unfortunately the lockdown in Derby has scuppered my plans. Spooky ....
That 3.3 day doubling time in London looks bad. Let's see what the ONS data says tomorrow.
London is empty so its hard to imagine an R rate that high
"London is empty"... Er what are you talking about? London has a population of over 9 million people! We are all still here.
I think thats the assumption that 'london' is the central tourist themepark.
London is one of those topics that people who know fuck all about it like to opine on here. Here's a suggestion - people who don't live in London and hate London, why don't you stop talking about London? Or at least stop taking our hard-earned money. One of the two.
Excellent. Let's make it general.
Posters who don't live in Scotland and hate Scotland should stop talking about Scotland.
Posters who don't live in Wales and hate Wales should stop talking about Wales.
The betting markets currently rate Biden's chance of winning Michigan as almost exactly the same as Trump's chance of winning Texas (odds of around 1.35 in both cases).
Strange, is it not?
Very strange. I don't think even the Republicans believe they have a hope in MI.
Fuckssake he's defending Corbyn AGAIN. "No individual findings against Jeremy Corbyn"
Well he is an ex lawyer, is he wrong on that point ? I have not read the full report.
He can have people expelled for bringing the party into disrepute. "They're all shit" in the report doesn't mean that he can't remove them all individually because it didn't say "x,y,z are shit"
The law doesn't come into it. Hard for Corbyn to challenge his expulsion legally on "disrepute" grounds. The party has just been brought to its knees because of him.
The law does come into it , whatever you say.Especially if you are basing any decisions on the Equalities act 2010.
"Bringing the Party into Disrepute" is subjective not legal and objective.
There's a degree of subjectivity about individual edge cases, but it has a well-defined and well understood meaning , and there's a stack of judicial decisions a mile high to show that the courts are happy to get stuck in and decide the edge cases.
That 3.3 day doubling time in London looks bad. Let's see what the ONS data says tomorrow.
London is empty so its hard to imagine an R rate that high
"London is empty"... Er what are you talking about? London has a population of over 9 million people! We are all still here.
I think thats the assumption that 'london' is the central tourist themepark.
London is one of those topics that people who know fuck all about it like to opine on here. Here's a suggestion - people who don't live in London and hate London, why don't you stop talking about London? Or at least stop taking our hard-earned money. One of the two.
Excellent. Let's make it general.
Posters who don't live in Scotland and hate Scotland should stop talking about Scotland.
Posters who don't live in Wales and hate Wales should stop talking about Wales.
Threads should be much more manageable now.
Agreed on that. Scotland is another topic that the haters like to chat shit about. I never talk about Wales because I don't know anything about the place. I've never even slept a night on Welsh soil.
Comments
FWIW this is my EC map - Biden 322 .. Trump 216
https://www.270towin.com/maps/VO78Z
I have not read the full report.
According to Virginia Department of Elections web page Hilary won Loudoun by 17% (55.1% to 38.2%). I'd hate to get excited about Biden winning by 10 points.
https://results.elections.virginia.gov/vaelections/2016 November General/Site/Locality/LOUDOUN COUNTY/Index.html
- The report confirms the leader's office interfered in complaints.
- The report confirms there was antisemitism.
- The report confirms there were laws broken.
- Corbyn is repeating the line the problem was exaggerated by the media.
- The EHRC have said it was for him not them to look into Corbyn
Then there is enough there to say that if he is serious then Corbyn's whip should be suspended.https://twitter.com/Frances_Coppola/status/1321776773282041856?s=20
"Protected characteristics
These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1321778721792155648?s=20
I can almost accept Starmer not booting out Cornyn on air, but he's got at best 24 hours to do the right thing.
Biden 51 .. Trump 46 - 1001 RV
Biden 51 .. Trump 47 - 743 LV
Via 538
I would, personally, hand the report to a suitable commission in the party. Who would have the remit of implementing recommendations and recommending actions to be taken. Including against individuals.
Thanks for your reply on Tax Havens.
I used to be pretty keen on GAAR but then when I was in the biz I trusted the UK Government(s) and thought it was the kind of thing they were likely to do well. I envisaged the setting up of a Commission with autocratic but benign powers, a small team of suitably qualified professionals, an appeals procedure and a process for clearances in advance. Works well in other countries, I thought; no reason why it wouldn't in the UK.
Now I look at Boris and the collection of mates he has rewarded with vital roles to which they are ill-suited. Imagine for example Dido Harding as head of the GAAR Commission.
You understand my reservations, yes?
Biden 52 .. Trump 44 - 1000 LV
Via 538
Ultimately it's politics, indeed.
Trump fans are convinced he can win despite all the evidence that he won't.
Trump haters are scared that he'll win so are backing him as a hedge.
This has led to a fantastic opportunity to make money.
eg You can back Biden to win and his percentage vote to be between 46 and 52% guaranteeing a small profit and doubling up if he wins with less than 52 (quite likely).
Freeroll!
One the one hand you are arguing the last loto should have not and now the present one should.
Right now Starmer's either getting it wrong, or playing a high risk game for a few hours to let Corbyn hang himself. It's probably the former.
Latest figures from NHS Wales show 1,110 Covid-19 patients are currently in hospital - which is more than 80% of the level at the pandemic's peak in April.
Despite how we know all of this is a lagging indicator, brave call to come out of the firebreak while this is going on.
Part of the problem here is that Western world is largely post-religious - in the sense that people from times past would see it. Yes, plenty of people bothering God etc. But it isn't the core of our lives anymore. So we don't *get it*.
It is incredibly hard to understand the mindset - this is one where religion and life are tightly bound together. a perceived insult to religion isn't just someone saying some abstract thing. It is a vicious, hurtful, attack on your very being.
Try reading the *human* stories of the Reformation. People prepared to die by burning. Rational, thinking people doing so. Often, rational, thinking people doing the burning... Because their connection to their God was that important....
https://twitter.com/ChrisHopkins92/status/1321765651573284864?s=20
The law doesn't come into it. Hard for Corbyn to challenge his expulsion legally on "disrepute" grounds. The party has just been brought to its knees because of him.
The report only criticises two individuals by name (Livingstone and a local councillor) and focuses on process. Its recommendations highloight an incoherent and slow response to criticism, as well as interference in individual cases in 2016-18 by the LOTO office - it concedes that sometimes the interference had the effect of taking a more severe response, but rightly says it shouldn't have happened at all.
I think it's a fair report which should be accepted. It doesn't accuse either Corbyn or the party of institutional anti-semitism, as some of the critics hoped it would, but it does show a picture of an incoherent and sometimes shambolic complaints procedure subject to political intervention. That has to be addressed fully, without delay. The report notes that the issue is not restricted to Labour, and it would be reasonable to ask how that Conservative investigation into its alleged Islamophobia is getting on. Is it actually happening at all?
Please understand, I'm not suggesting is a Trump victory a likely outcome, but merely trying to understand why the betting odds, rather strangely and contrary to Mike Smithson's reasonable supposition have been moving against Biden over recent days.
Further 48 Peter's food factory workers test positive
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-54732375
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DMLMGjv6z3fgJ41auwoomcGzg_pabwSQjIsfpI6wnqc/edit#gid=0
Biggest projected swings to Biden (over 5%): New Hampshire, Tennessee, Kentucky, Maine 2nd, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, West Virginia, North Dakota, South Dakota.
Projected swings to Trump: California, D.C.
Less than 2% projected swing to Biden: Illinois, Louisiana, Hawaii, Florida, Utah, Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8891313/Labour-MP-Apsana-Begum-charged-housing-fraud.html
https://twitter.com/chedetofficial/status/1321765560233811970?s=20
https://twitter.com/chedetofficial/status/1321765587530338304?s=20
No - its not a parody or fake account.
Corbyn may the the minimum offering required. And would be a Clause 4 moment for SKS, at which point a lot of non Labour people would take a second look, and ask if they might possibly prefer SKS to Dominic.
The other thing he could do is adopt a policy of applying to join EFTA.
Many of the foreigners who entered Germany in those heady days are being forcibly sent home to Africa, south Asia, the Middle East, Russia and the Balkans on secret flights, marshalled by security officers, after being frogmarched to airports from their beds by armed police.
Others live in fear in migrant camps dotted throughout Germany. They know that any day a police posse could arrive, handcuff them, and drive them straight to a waiting plane destined for their home country. The Mail has discovered that hundreds who were afraid of being deported from Germany have fled to Calais where traffickers put them on boats or on lorries on ferries across the Channel.
Some 200,000 failed asylum seekers, illegal entrants, and foreigners convicted of crimes in their own countries or Germany are estimated to be listed for deportation flights. Many entered in 2015 when Mrs Merkel sent out her welcome message to refugees.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8890545/Five-years-ago-Angela-Merkel-threw-open-borders-million-migrants.html
I would very be concerned if your example became prosecutable.
A plague on both their houses.
https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1321784213100789762?s=20
He hasn't done either and he has actively defended Corbyn instead. 🤦🏻♂️
Model railway maker Hornby has seen its sales surge by 33% in the six months to the end of September, as more people took up hobbies in lockdown.
Biden 56 .. Trump 44 - 2500 LV
https://www.vox.com/21538653/poll-biden-trump-texas-university-dallas
It comes down to the issue - what is more important, freedom of speech, or not offending in a fundamental (ha) way, a minority group.
Florida
Biden 51 (+3)
Trump 47 (-1)
Changes with 7 September.
Will we be getting a daily ARSE?
So tweet #12 is a bit misleading
Interesting that you have GA blue but FL red – similar unorthodox forecast to that of @Gallowgate I believe?
Charlie H is not to my taste - it seem to me crass and unamusing - but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be published.
I am not entirely comfortable with the state making a point of republishing its more offensive sallies, but in the face or terror, governments cannot back down.
Strange, is it not?
Biden 48 .. Trump 46
https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/GeorgiaResults102820.pdf
It shouldn't be.
"Throughout the period we investigated, there was political interference in the handling of antisemitism complaints – as part of a wider practice of LOTO involvement in disciplinary cases that were deemed ‘politically sensitive’...
We found that this political interference was not part of the Labour Party’s formal complaints process, so it was not a legitimate approach to determining complaints... We concluded that this was indirectly discriminatory and unlawful, and that the Labour Party was legally responsible for it."
Who was running the LOTO in this period?
It isn't the EHRC's role to finger individuals - it's role is to look at corporate failings. But as the body being criticised, as well as addressing the corporate failings, you do have to discipline individuals who are still part of the set-up in some way and who were involved in the key decisions.
When you refer refer to 'lockdown in Derby', you are referring to Covid I take it and not the local dungeon mistress? Ooo...er!
Now where did I leave my feather boa....?
https://twitter.com/GMA/status/1321779569540685825?s=20
https://twitter.com/JamesAALongman/status/1321741196490874880?s=20
Posters who don't live in Scotland and hate Scotland should stop talking about Scotland.
Posters who don't live in Wales and hate Wales should stop talking about Wales.
Threads should be much more manageable now.
Citizen Data (Who??)
TX
Biden 51
Trump 42
No previous polling that I can see.
They also have Biden with 5-8pt leads in a bunch of swing states, although trailing in OH.