Like Stalin and Superman, Starmer is the man of steel – politicalbetting.com

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gallowgate said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gallowgate said:

Leon said:

another_richard said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

A reporter asks Bukele if Kilmar Ábrego García will be returned to the US.

"How can I return a criminal to the US? Smuggle a terrorist in?," Bukele replies.

He then calls the question "absurd" and says he won't release Ábrego García because he isn't fond of releasing people from his prisons.

"The question is preposterous," Bukele says. "I don't have the power to return him to the United States."

Which means, if the US government doesn't contradict this, that the Trump administration has taken to itself the power to disappear people, innocent or guilty.

Number 3 just happened.

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bukele-abrego-garcia-and-red-lines
...But if it’s number 3?

Let us speak plainly: Nayib Bukele is a minor strongman who will do whatever Donald Trump demands of him. If Trump wants Abrego Garcia in the United States, then Bukele will return him. By the same token, if Bukele understands that Trump does not want Abrego Garcia returned, then he will keep the man.

Bukele has no interests in this game other than pleasing his political patron. His exercise of Salvadoran “sovereignty” can only be read as an expression of Donald Trump’s will.

Anyone who asserts otherwise is either a villain or a fool.

So if Bukele affirmatively refuses to repatriate Abrego Garcia, it will mean that Trump has told him not to.

At which point the Supreme Court will face a choice.

Surrender or escalation?..

Bill Kristol
@BillKristol
·
13m
Watching Trump and Bukele in the Oval Office just now made me feel physically ill.

He makes the skin crawl of any right thinking person anywhere. Oh America, what the hell have you done?

It’s the inevitable endpoint of woke leftism. The people will voluntarily elect right wing strongmen

The exact same thing will happen in the UK if we don’t reverse course on multiple crucial issues. Firstly, migration

How many times do the centrist dads need to be told this?

Okay, migration.

Are you still a supporter of unrestricted immigration from the EU ?

No. I want zero net migration. Immigration is a disaster and multiculturalism is a catastrophe

You can have net zero migration but the ship has sailed on multiculturalism unless you’re planning to deport anyone who isn’t a christian.

Why? You don't have to deport people to support adherence to a single unifying culture.

Because you can “support” what you want but without repression you can’t enforce a monoculture

There's a spectrum. Switzerland doesn't ban other faiths (very few societies have) but it supports a single civic (and Christian based) democratic society, and did ban minarets on buildings after a referendum. I'm not advocating that, but Switzerland is a pretty good societal model.

It's not about 'enforcing' social conformity but currently we fund, support and foster movements whose stated aim is to divide us along sectional lines. Why do we do that?

When you talk of "movements whose stated aim is to divide us along sectional lines", I take it you mean Reform UK?

Roger said:

Leon Livermore Isam and Lucky Guy.

So Monday night's Nazi night......?

Sorry my mistake

Is that like a themed curry night?

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You now can't get a visa to come here unless you have a job offer for a job of at least £38k a year and nor can you bring dependents in either so I highly doubt that is happening.

Not to mention most immigrants are not Muslim anyway and 94% of the UK population are not Muslim either

It isn't actually true. It is more complicated than that and has more holes than swiss cheese.

The list of exemptions to the £38k amount is extremely large and the government relaxed a number of things further since they have been in power / binned off other things that were due to come into place.

Some of perfectly sensible e.g. PhDs / Post-docs, but there are massive loopholes you can drive a bus through where you only need to earn £30k e.g. the need another Bangladeshi "chef" for my Indian takeaway because British people don't have the required skills.

Also £38k a year now isn't that high these days. It just the average salary.

The median UK salary for all workers is £31,602, so clearly below the minimum visa threshold. Though hardly surprising this Labour governnment is expanding the exemptions

https://www.avtrinity.com/news/what-is-the-average-salary-in-the-uk-full-data-and-heatmap#:~:text=The median average salary for,in 2024 was £38,224.

Well if you want to be that pedantic. Ok, for "full time" workers it is £38k, which I bloody hope people we are giving visa to are coming to be full time not part time for 16hrs a week + benefits.

And also as I say its a bit irrelevant, because there are so many loopholes that the £30k is an option for many (nowadays you can make that even on minimum wage if you are doing long hours) and hence why the example of takeaways can continually get new foreign staff in despite there being plenty of local options.

IanB2 said:

No thread on a day when political betting has actually been in the news?

I didn't have the mental strength to write it this afternoon, hopefully I'll have something ready for the morning.

Cyclefree said:

You've all enjoyed @Leon's photos of his drinks occasionally accompanied by food in various exotic locations. And @IanB2's well-travelled dog.

I now bring you the anti-photo: dinner at 5:15 in a north-western hospital while staring at the rain and police van.



Those who provide the dinner and the endless tea and biscuits at regular intervals plus lunch and breakfast are relentlessly and charmingly cheerful and friendly. The doctors and nurses have been equally solicitous, which has taken a little of the edge off their remarks which both suggest something potentially very serious which must be tested for and explored while also not actually telling you the worst. It's an odd experience going in for X to be told that the real problems are likely Y and Z. It allows you to be hopeful and scared at the same time.

At any event they have been very efficient so far and last night's madwoman has disappeared.

I knew I shouldn't have been so gleeful at the end of my contract. I was skipping around merrily on Saturday in glorious sunshine. Now I'm facing God knows what.

"Uomo propone. Dio dispone"

That'll learn me. Again.

Fingers crossed for you.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

BTW

I have Covid again, and it's making me grumpy as f*ck, so I think you should all watch your manners on here if you don't want to face the ban hammer.

I've just broken up with my other half after nearly six years together (formally) so I am also grumpy.

Sorry to hear that. You must surely be the most eligible singleton on PB?

I read that as most eligible simpleton, which I thought harsh.
Must get my eye test booked…

Scott_xP said:

Some light relief

https://x.com/PhilipWegmann/status/1911869267164930395

Almost worthy of Liz.

Cyclefree said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Cyclefree said:

You've all enjoyed @Leon's photos of his drinks occasionally accompanied by food in various exotic locations. And @IanB2's well-travelled dog.

I now bring you the anti-photo: dinner at 5:15 in a north-western hospital while staring at the rain and police van.



Those who provide the dinner and the endless tea and biscuits at regular intervals plus lunch and breakfast are relentlessly and charmingly cheerful and friendly. The doctors and nurses have been equally solicitous, which has taken a little of the edge off their remarks which both suggest something potentially very serious which must be tested for and explored while also not actually telling you the worst. It's an odd experience going in for X to be told that the real problems are likely Y and Z. It allows you to be hopeful and scared at the same time.

At any event they have been very efficient so far and last night's madwoman has disappeared.

I knew I shouldn't have been so gleeful at the end of my contract. I was skipping around merrily on Saturday in glorious sunshine. Now I'm facing God knows what.

"Uomo propone. Dio dispone"

That'll learn me. Again.

Thoughts etc….

The food looks like someone tried. I know - but they seem to have tried.

There is, however, no dog for scale. How could you?

Are you seeing the same doctors? Or is it a new chap looking at the chart, each time?

I am seeing 3 different specialists for 3 issues. And more new diagnostic interventions. When the first doctor who saw me said they would "throw the book at me" I never realised he meant it to this extent. 😨

The good news is that if there is something seriously wrong, hopefully, it will have been caught in time. Unless it's too late, of course. But I am going to firmly tell that thought to take a hike because I'd like to get some sleep tonight.

The NHS, in my experience (Platinum Centurion Lounge frequent flyer) is very good at emergencies.

For longer term stuff treat it like shopping for a particularly important handbag - this is what my wife taught me. Pick and choose, read all the reviews and demand the best.

rottenborough said:

David Frum
@davidfrum
·
2h
Trump defying a 9-0 Supreme Court decision is the reason I say "if we still have free and fair elections in the United States" when I talk about 2026 midterms.

https://x.com/davidfrum/status/1911836219480166563

Anyone know what happens next? Presumably the President isn't meant to ignore the Supreme Court, but is there anything they can do to enforce their will?

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Was Liz Truss always this mad and hid it to climb the greasy poll or was it encounter with the "deep state"* that caused it?

* she never shuts up about it these days and appears to be basically include everything.

It's PTSD.

The shortest serving PM, removed by her own party has had an impact.

I bet she gets triggered when she orders a salad and sees a lettuce.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Was Liz Truss always this mad and hid it to climb the greasy poll or was it encounter with the "deep state"* that caused it?

* she never shuts up about it these days and appears to be basically include everything.

Johnson was madder, but he got away with it for longer

Andy_JS said:

"I was horrified to hear about what happened to Vanessa Brown last month. In March, Ms Brown, 50, was arrested on suspicion of theft and then detained, searched and banged up by Surrey Police for nearly eight hours after she took her daughters’ iPads away in an effort to get her 16-year-old eldest daughter to focus on revision. She went to visit her mother in Cobham for a coffee, took the tablets with her and a couple of hours later had the plod knocking on the door to conduct a “welfare check”, before arresting her. There but for the grace of God, etc. Surrey Police has since apologised, and acknowledged its error."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/14/police-overreach-vanessa-brown-parenting/

Weird case. I’d like to know who the man in his forties who reported the iPads as stolen is. And why he did that. Did the girls claim that they had been stolen? Hence the police action?

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Was Liz Truss always this mad and hid it to climb the greasy poll or was it encounter with the "deep state"* that caused it?

* she never shuts up about it these days and appears to be basically include everything.

It's PTSD.

The shortest serving PM, removed by her own party has had an impact.

I bet she gets triggered when she orders a salad and sees a lettuce.

The bit that's harder to explain is the actions of the Telegraph in printing this stuff.

If it were a bit of satirical tomfoolery- Private Eye's Dee Niall column made flesh- it would be understandable, if cruel. One up from visiting Bedlam as an after-dinner treat.

But if you want to promote right wing values, surely there is a better spokesman than Liz Truss.

algarkirk said:

It's looking as if Trump has decided that the Garcia case is one where he is prepared for a full on constitutional crisis. But, despite the overwhelming moral case for his return to the USA and release from prison, following his accidental rendition in the end the SCOTUS might have to accept that it falls between legal cracks, as the USA government can always deny that it has power over a foreign jurisdiction, even though it very obviously does in this case, and El Salvador can simply not get involved.

I wonder if a third country (Canada comes to mind) might offer to take him?

Useful update from David Allen Green here:

https://davidallengreen.com/2025/04/a-note-about-injunctions-in-the-context-of-the-abrego-garcia-case/

I think there are several lacunae in DLG's commentary - some of the perhaps having been left by him deliberately.

He talks about "a federal court" - and there are several Federal courts involved here.

Plus some confusion in the comments, perhaps particularly around the nature of Equity Law in the UK vs the USA.

(Not having read PB comments between 6pm and now, GMT).

Reading the President's of El Salvador's statement, it sounds to me as though he is conspiring with Trump to try and corruptly manipulate SCOTUS. Leaving aside the issue of unconstitutional behaviour of SCOTUS itself.

There is also the matter of the hundreds of others (~200?) unlawfully deported.

And aside from that here the patently manipulative commentary by Martin Daubney and others on GB News this afternoon heard whilst waiting in an opthalmic clinic, from Daubney's position embedded in Trump's anus.

(* It is not very clear whether he is actually President - the SCOEL did the non-consecutive term gloss of the Constitution of the similar type that Trump may be after, with clearer precedent than Trump possesses.)

bondegezou said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

The post you are responding to is probably one of the most remarkable contributions to PB in its twenty year history.

Andrew Neil.

Thought climate change was a hoax.

Now thinks net zero is pointless.

Charletan.

turbotubbs said:

Andy_JS said:

"I was horrified to hear about what happened to Vanessa Brown last month. In March, Ms Brown, 50, was arrested on suspicion of theft and then detained, searched and banged up by Surrey Police for nearly eight hours after she took her daughters’ iPads away in an effort to get her 16-year-old eldest daughter to focus on revision. She went to visit her mother in Cobham for a coffee, took the tablets with her and a couple of hours later had the plod knocking on the door to conduct a “welfare check”, before arresting her. There but for the grace of God, etc. Surrey Police has since apologised, and acknowledged its error."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/14/police-overreach-vanessa-brown-parenting/

Weird case. I’d like to know who the man in his forties who reported the iPads as stolen is. And why he did that. Did the girls claim that they had been stolen? Hence the police action?

Am I correct in thinking that this arrest is now something that has to be reported to the US authorities for travel, and the existence of such an arrest may become a reason for detention for say a fortnight without legal representation, and rendition again without legal representation or any process to Louisiana or Texas or El Salvador?

I hope she does not have any tattoos.

I have not looked at either the Telegrunt, or Mumsnet.

Trump could get Garcia back to the USA tomorrow but has chosen not to . This administration will never apologise for anything . From top to bottom you’d be hard pressed to find a more loathsome group of individuals.

Just, absolutely, fuck the UK

If you’re a native white Briton, emigrate. You’re not wanted

Telegraph:


“NHS trusts are fast-tracking ethnic minorities to top jobs to meet diversity quotas.

At least 11 major hospital trusts around England have schemes or programmes focused on helping ethnic minority employees to gain promotions to senior roles.

The drive to “improve representation” in management positions and on boards has included initiatives such as “reverse mentoring” and “white ally training”, as well as dedicated development opportunities for ethnic minorities.

The policies are on top of NHS guidance, revealed by The Telegraph, encouraging all recruiters to ensure that there is a black or other ethnic minority candidate on all interview shortlists.

Other NHS equality, diversity and inclusion policies include recommending the Rooney Rule – an American football policy that makes it mandatory for ethnic minorities to be shortlisted for interviews if they apply – making managers justify hiring white British nationals, as well as using race as a “tie-breaker” if two candidates are equal.”

MattW said:

turbotubbs said:

Andy_JS said:

"I was horrified to hear about what happened to Vanessa Brown last month. In March, Ms Brown, 50, was arrested on suspicion of theft and then detained, searched and banged up by Surrey Police for nearly eight hours after she took her daughters’ iPads away in an effort to get her 16-year-old eldest daughter to focus on revision. She went to visit her mother in Cobham for a coffee, took the tablets with her and a couple of hours later had the plod knocking on the door to conduct a “welfare check”, before arresting her. There but for the grace of God, etc. Surrey Police has since apologised, and acknowledged its error."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/14/police-overreach-vanessa-brown-parenting/

Weird case. I’d like to know who the man in his forties who reported the iPads as stolen is. And why he did that. Did the girls claim that they had been stolen? Hence the police action?

Am I correct in thinking that this arrest is now something that has to be reported to the US authorities for travel, and the existence of such an arrest may become a reason for detention for say a fortnight without legal representation, and rendition again without legal representation or any process to Louisiana or Texas or El Salvador?

I hope she does not have any tattoos.

I have not looked at either the Telegrunt, or Mumsnet.

It’s not fully clear what’s gone on, but I think the fact that they were reported as stolen and that she initially denied having them have inflated a family squabble into something bigger. I have some sympathy for the police. We constantly complain that they do not investigate thefts and then when they do we complain again. If she hadn’t lied it might not have been 7 hours in a cell.

Mexicanpete said:

turbotubbs said:

Andy_JS said:

"I was horrified to hear about what happened to Vanessa Brown last month. In March, Ms Brown, 50, was arrested on suspicion of theft and then detained, searched and banged up by Surrey Police for nearly eight hours after she took her daughters’ iPads away in an effort to get her 16-year-old eldest daughter to focus on revision. She went to visit her mother in Cobham for a coffee, took the tablets with her and a couple of hours later had the plod knocking on the door to conduct a “welfare check”, before arresting her. There but for the grace of God, etc. Surrey Police has since apologised, and acknowledged its error."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/14/police-overreach-vanessa-brown-parenting/

Weird case. I’d like to know who the man in his forties who reported the iPads as stolen is. And why he did that. Did the girls claim that they had been stolen? Hence the police action?

That is sterling work and swift action by Surrey Constabulary. My son is still waiting to be interviewed by South Wales Police eighteen months after his £700 bike was stolen using bolt cutters outside the BBC in Cardiff.

Police must be so much better resourced under Labour than the Tories. Good work chaps!

This is why there is clearly more to this than meets the eye. Something about welfare concerns?

HYUFD said:

stodge said:

After this morning's Mainstreet Research poll, which got all the Conservatives on here excited as it showed a 2 point lead for Poilievre's party, the other daily rolling polls from Nanos and Liaison have maintained strong Liberal leads of 6 and 7 points respectively while the weekly Pollara poll has an 8 point Liberal lead.

As for Australia, while some Coalition supporters cling to the Newspoll numbers like a liferaft, the fact is the Resolve Strategy polling showing a 7 point 2pp lead for Labor is the more recent fieldwork ending yesterday.

Yet even those polls have the Conservatives polling at their highest level since 2011.

Newspoll is normally the most accurate pollster in Australia and even they slightly underestimated the Coalition last time and even Resolve has the Coalition 3% ahead of Labor on the primary vote

As @Andy_JS has pointed out and I have on any number of occasions, Canadian polling at Federal level is much less useful as a guide.

There hasn't been much regional polling - the latest is from Saskatchewan, a province dominated by the Conservatives. That polling has the CPC on 38%, the Liberals on 25% and the NDP on 11%. In 2021, the CPC won all 14 seats in the province with 59% of the vote, the NDP were second with 21% and the Liberals trailed with 10.5%.

That's a swing to the Liberals of about 7% - now what might be telling us is the Liberals are picking up on anti-Trump sentiment in the prairies but that might not translate into ridings gained whereas in the more crucial areas of Toronto and Quebec it might be the CPC is doing a bit better so they may yet pick up some marginals. Fascinating if true.

As for Australia, you and I both know the Coalition usually wins most votes but Labor pick up transfers from the Greens and the Teals. Indeed, at the 2022 election, the Coalition got 35% and Labor 32% but on the 2pp vote Labor was ahead 52-48 and won the election. To be fair, looking at State polling gives a better picture for the Coalition who are doing better in Victoria and Queensland but losing ground in New South Wales. Looking at individual state and even individual electorate polling may offer a better guide than Federal polling here as well.

a

turbotubbs said:

Mexicanpete said:

turbotubbs said:

Andy_JS said:

"I was horrified to hear about what happened to Vanessa Brown last month. In March, Ms Brown, 50, was arrested on suspicion of theft and then detained, searched and banged up by Surrey Police for nearly eight hours after she took her daughters’ iPads away in an effort to get her 16-year-old eldest daughter to focus on revision. She went to visit her mother in Cobham for a coffee, took the tablets with her and a couple of hours later had the plod knocking on the door to conduct a “welfare check”, before arresting her. There but for the grace of God, etc. Surrey Police has since apologised, and acknowledged its error."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/14/police-overreach-vanessa-brown-parenting/

Weird case. I’d like to know who the man in his forties who reported the iPads as stolen is. And why he did that. Did the girls claim that they had been stolen? Hence the police action?

That is sterling work and swift action by Surrey Constabulary. My son is still waiting to be interviewed by South Wales Police eighteen months after his £700 bike was stolen using bolt cutters outside the BBC in Cardiff.

Police must be so much better resourced under Labour than the Tories. Good work chaps!

This is why there is clearly more to this than meets the eye. Something about welfare concerns?

Given I’ve observed the strange interest that the police took in apparent cracks in tail lights - when the car is driven by the right demographic… Why should this be much different?

Malmesbury said:

bondegezou said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

Oh well…

from Imgflip Meme Generator

Ironically, Donald Trump begins to resemble Robert Mugabe.

Leon said:

I despise my own country

We still have standards here and wouldn’t elect someone like Trump . You’ve become totally obsessed by your woke hysteria and seem to love what’s going on in the USA even though they’re dismantling democracy there .

Leon said:

I despise my own country

Nur-Sultan was renamed back to Astana in 2022.

Leon said:

Just, absolutely, fuck the UK

If you’re a native white Briton, emigrate. You’re not wanted

Telegraph:


“NHS trusts are fast-tracking ethnic minorities to top jobs to meet diversity quotas.

At least 11 major hospital trusts around England have schemes or programmes focused on helping ethnic minority employees to gain promotions to senior roles.

The drive to “improve representation” in management positions and on boards has included initiatives such as “reverse mentoring” and “white ally training”, as well as dedicated development opportunities for ethnic minorities.

The policies are on top of NHS guidance, revealed by The Telegraph, encouraging all recruiters to ensure that there is a black or other ethnic minority candidate on all interview shortlists.

Other NHS equality, diversity and inclusion policies include recommending the Rooney Rule – an American football policy that makes it mandatory for ethnic minorities to be shortlisted for interviews if they apply – making managers justify hiring white British nationals, as well as using race as a “tie-breaker” if two candidates are equal.”

If this is the quality of tonight's discourse, it is certainly time for bed. Perhaps any nasty racists will have calmed down after a good night's sleep.

eek said:

nico67 said:

Leon said:

I despise my own country

We still have standards here and wouldn’t elect someone like Trump . You’ve become totally obsessed by your woke hysteria and seem to love what’s going on in the USA even though they’re dismantling democracy there .

You say that but we elected Bozo the clown...

Bozo is the Flying Nun compared to Trump .

From the U.S. Holocaust Museum:

"What distinguishes a concentration camp from a prison (in the modern sense) is that it functions outside of a judicial system. The prisoners are not indicted or convicted of any crime by judicial process."
https://x.com/themaxburns/status/1911868474881683768

"Home growns are next."

Cookie said:

bondegezou said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

I think it's clear that Isam thinks 1960s Rhodesia is not a model we should be following.

The irony being that white Rhodesians in the late 1960s were mostly immigrants.

The white population of Southern Rhodesia was 75 000 in 1945, and treble that by the mid 1960s.

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

Just, absolutely, fuck the UK

If you’re a native white Briton, emigrate. You’re not wanted

Telegraph:


“NHS trusts are fast-tracking ethnic minorities to top jobs to meet diversity quotas.

At least 11 major hospital trusts around England have schemes or programmes focused on helping ethnic minority employees to gain promotions to senior roles.

The drive to “improve representation” in management positions and on boards has included initiatives such as “reverse mentoring” and “white ally training”, as well as dedicated development opportunities for ethnic minorities.

The policies are on top of NHS guidance, revealed by The Telegraph, encouraging all recruiters to ensure that there is a black or other ethnic minority candidate on all interview shortlists.

Other NHS equality, diversity and inclusion policies include recommending the Rooney Rule – an American football policy that makes it mandatory for ethnic minorities to be shortlisted for interviews if they apply – making managers justify hiring white British nationals, as well as using race as a “tie-breaker” if two candidates are equal.”

If this is the quality of tonight's discourse, it is certainly time for bed. Perhaps any nasty racists will have calmed down after a good night's sleep.

You think it's a good thing that the state is prioritising people by race?

Leon said:

I despise my own country

Is that why you voted for Starmer in Holborn and St Pancras?

Trump channeling Leon again.

“I took a cognitive test and I got the highest score, and one of the doctors said, ‘Sir, I’ve never seen anyone get that score — that was the highest score.’” — Trump
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1911822076132134936

rottenborough said:

Higher risk corporate bonds just not selling in Trump's new world.


Jack Surfleet
@jacksurfleet
Tuesday's FINANCIAL TIMES UK EDITION: Bond market freezes out higher-risk borrowers since Trump's tariffs blitz
#TomorrowsPapersToday
https://x.com/jacksurfleet/status/1911875482955505698

Last week even the US Treasury market came within an ace of a total buyers strike. The US hit the iceberg. It's now only how the wreck settles before the inevitable fall

Cookie said:

bondegezou said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

I think it's clear that Isam thinks 1960s Rhodesia is not a model we should be following.

He’s promoting the model of Orania, a white supremacist town in South Africa.

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Some users really do make this site so much worse. Just look at the discourse with and without certain users present.

@Mexicanpete is absolutely right.

Yes and no. Having different viewpoints is essential for having any kind of lively debate. If everyone agrees with each other then you head down Twitter alley and into the blue sky zone of never encountering a different opinion. It’s also good to have people make suggestions, claims etc that can be exposed with facts or sensible argument. Nick Griffin's career was ended by exposure on Question Time.
There are huge issues with race and mysogeny. Personally I think every person should he judged on their merits alone and sex, race (whatever that really means) etc should be irrelevant. And yet we have a world we’re somehow white men dominate positions of power, and business and in all likelihood the higher echelons of the NHS (although I’d expect a higher level of white women in the NHS). So for some, action needs to be taken. And usually that action is not about disadvantaging white men, rather it is about encouraging and helping others to aim higher in their careers.
But should we suppress those who don’t agree with this? I think not, lest something you hold dear becomes verboten.

I’ve got no issue with differing views. It’s when people come on here blatantly to troll and inflame arguments that I think what’s the point?

Cookie said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

Just, absolutely, fuck the UK

If you’re a native white Briton, emigrate. You’re not wanted

Telegraph:


“NHS trusts are fast-tracking ethnic minorities to top jobs to meet diversity quotas.

At least 11 major hospital trusts around England have schemes or programmes focused on helping ethnic minority employees to gain promotions to senior roles.

The drive to “improve representation” in management positions and on boards has included initiatives such as “reverse mentoring” and “white ally training”, as well as dedicated development opportunities for ethnic minorities.

The policies are on top of NHS guidance, revealed by The Telegraph, encouraging all recruiters to ensure that there is a black or other ethnic minority candidate on all interview shortlists.

Other NHS equality, diversity and inclusion policies include recommending the Rooney Rule – an American football policy that makes it mandatory for ethnic minorities to be shortlisted for interviews if they apply – making managers justify hiring white British nationals, as well as using race as a “tie-breaker” if two candidates are equal.”

If this is the quality of tonight's discourse, it is certainly time for bed. Perhaps any nasty racists will have calmed down after a good night's sleep.

You think it's a good thing that the state is prioritising people by race?

The state has been prioritising white peoples for centuries. The NHS policies described are trying to make up for that past… well, not just past, the present, given ongoing inequalities and given the rampant racism still present in our society (see this thread).

It remains illegal to appoint someone based on their ethnicity. We’re talking about limited schemes encouraging some people. I think that’s a good thing.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Some users really do make this site so much worse. Just look at the discourse with and without certain users present.

@Mexicanpete is absolutely right.

Yes and no. Having different viewpoints is essential for having any kind of lively debate. If everyone agrees with each other then you head down Twitter alley and into the blue sky zone of never encountering a different opinion. It’s also good to have people make suggestions, claims etc that can be exposed with facts or sensible argument. Nick Griffin's career was ended by exposure on Question Time.
There are huge issues with race and mysogeny. Personally I think every person should he judged on their merits alone and sex, race (whatever that really means) etc should be irrelevant. And yet we have a world we’re somehow white men dominate positions of power, and business and in all likelihood the higher echelons of the NHS (although I’d expect a higher level of white women in the NHS). So for some, action needs to be taken. And usually that action is not about disadvantaging white men, rather it is about encouraging and helping others to aim higher in their careers.
But should we suppress those who don’t agree with this? I think not, lest something you hold dear becomes verboten.

I’ve got no issue with differing views. It’s when people come on here blatantly to troll and inflame arguments that I think what’s the point?

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Some users really do make this site so much worse. Just look at the discourse with and without certain users present.

@Mexicanpete is absolutely right.

Yes and no. Having different viewpoints is essential for having any kind of lively debate. If everyone agrees with each other then you head down Twitter alley and into the blue sky zone of never encountering a different opinion. It’s also good to have people make suggestions, claims etc that can be exposed with facts or sensible argument. Nick Griffin's career was ended by exposure on Question Time.
There are huge issues with race and mysogeny. Personally I think every person should he judged on their merits alone and sex, race (whatever that really means) etc should be irrelevant. And yet we have a world we’re somehow white men dominate positions of power, and business and in all likelihood the higher echelons of the NHS (although I’d expect a higher level of white women in the NHS). So for some, action needs to be taken. And usually that action is not about disadvantaging white men, rather it is about encouraging and helping others to aim higher in their careers.
But should we suppress those who don’t agree with this? I think not, lest something you hold dear becomes verboten.

I’ve got no issue with differing views. It’s when people come on here blatantly to troll and inflame arguments that I think what’s the point?

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It’s not impossible, and imposing a limit on posts would be a death knell for comments. You current account has nearly a thousand days of posts on that scale.

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It’s not impossible, and imposing a limit on posts would be a death knell for comments. You current account has nearly a thousand days of posts on that scale.

I strongly disagree with you. I self-limit what I post these days primarily because of one user. But for all our sakes this place would be better if we were all limited to a few posts a day.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It’s not impossible, and imposing a limit on posts would be a death knell for comments. You current account has nearly a thousand days of posts on that scale.

I strongly disagree with you. I self-limit what I post these days primarily because of one user. But for all our sakes this place would be better if we were all limited to a few posts a day.

Not sure I see a benefit to that, to be honest. Almost all “regulars” would exceed that, stifling a lot of interesting discussions.

bondegezou said:

Cookie said:

bondegezou said:

isam said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Not sure I want to poke a sick bear either - hope you feel better soon, Robert.

I always enjoy a good rant on immigration - we now see the two aspects to the question. In simple terms, what do we do to stop "them" coming? What do we do about the ones already here?

No one, it seems to me, has come up with a coherent approach to net zero migration apart from having it as a policy objective but that's up there with good public services, balanced public finances, strong defences and low inflation as platitudes which we all know to be largely unachievable currently.

What does "net zero migration" look like? One out, one in presumably. Not sure how that would work in practice - all those arriving illegally immediately deported without process (genuine refugees?) but how else would this be monitored without a considerable bureaucracy monitoring arrivals and departures?

While we're struggling with that, what about those already here, whether legally or illegally? The immediate deportation of all foreign-born criminals irrespective of the crime and sentence but do we go for a one strike and you're out whereby any non-British citizen convicted of any custodial offence gets immediately deported?

We'd need to spend a lot on enhancing the border protection side of law enforcement to hunt down visa overstayers (presumably mainly students) and deport them as well.

What about re-migration (or voluntary repatriation as it used to be called)? Do we offer those from for example Syria money to return? What about those from other countries (including EU members)?

Some of these questions may seem harsh but they seem to be to the main obstacles to the implementation of the kind of policies being put forward by Reform and others. There seem to be some serious financial aspects to all this in terms of needing to spend a lot of money to make the policy work.

Besides the practical questions about immigration and migration, there's the cultural angle to all of this. That's where the waters get even murkier.

I think there will be an Islamic Political party here within the next decade or two which will see UK politics change like never before. I doubt there is anything that can be done by those who wish immigration should have been limited in the past now. It is over. I feel like a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia

My guess is there will be a new country formed in the Eastern European nations which haven't succumbed to Islamic immigration and people will start to move there. A bit like Orania in South Africa.

You feel like "a white man living in late 1960s Salisbury, Rhodesia"? What the actual fuck?! Do you thinklate '60s Rhodesia is a model we should be following?

I think it's clear that Isam thinks 1960s Rhodesia is not a model we should be following.

He’s promoting the model of Orania, a white supremacist town in South Africa.

I'm saying I think that Europeans will end up creating something like that. Does that mean I am promoting it? I don't think so, I'm just saying it's what I think will happen in the next 50-60 years, I'm not about to start trying to set it up myself

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It’s not impossible, and imposing a limit on posts would be a death knell for comments. You current account has nearly a thousand days of posts on that scale.

I strongly disagree with you. I self-limit what I post these days primarily because of one user. But for all our sakes this place would be better if we were all limited to a few posts a day.

This amounts to a desire to censor what people post because you disagree with it. PB doesn’t do that, with the exception of a certain topic, the reasons for which are well known and have been well explained. There are on PB a range of viewpoints but for the most part we skew male, middle aged/slightly older, prosperous and frequently fairly centrist in outlook. The range of expertise is strong, with a hefty clump of IT/computing, but including many other professions. Read PB for a day and you will be better educated. You will also conclude that some users are prats.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It's fascinating to me that so many people on the left today have become so averse to free speech.

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

turbotubbs said:

Do you think that’s it? One user in particular does like to wind up and freely admits it, but you can always just ignore.

With the amount they spam and post in certain threads it’s basically impossible. I’d support a posting limit for us all, maybe 5 posts a day maximum.

It’s not impossible, and imposing a limit on posts would be a death knell for comments. You current account has nearly a thousand days of posts on that scale.

I strongly disagree with you. I self-limit what I post these days primarily because of one user. But for all our sakes this place would be better if we were all limited to a few posts a day.

This amounts to a desire to censor what people post because you disagree with it. PB doesn’t do that, with the exception of a certain topic, the reasons for which are well known and have been well explained. There are on PB a range of viewpoints but for the most part we skew male, middle aged/slightly older, prosperous and frequently fairly centrist in outlook. The range of expertise is strong, with a hefty clump of IT/computing, but including many other professions. Read PB for a day and you will be better educated. You will also conclude that some users are prats.

We know that we are free to talk about the quality of Radiohead playing live...

malcolmg said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

DougSeal said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Eabhal said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

A reporter asks Bukele if Kilmar Ábrego García will be returned to the US.

"How can I return a criminal to the US? Smuggle a terrorist in?," Bukele replies.

He then calls the question "absurd" and says he won't release Ábrego García because he isn't fond of releasing people from his prisons.

"The question is preposterous," Bukele says. "I don't have the power to return him to the United States."

Which means, if the US government doesn't contradict this, that the Trump administration has taken to itself the power to disappear people, innocent or guilty.

Number 3 just happened.

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/bukele-abrego-garcia-and-red-lines
...But if it’s number 3?

Let us speak plainly: Nayib Bukele is a minor strongman who will do whatever Donald Trump demands of him. If Trump wants Abrego Garcia in the United States, then Bukele will return him. By the same token, if Bukele understands that Trump does not want Abrego Garcia returned, then he will keep the man.

Bukele has no interests in this game other than pleasing his political patron. His exercise of Salvadoran “sovereignty” can only be read as an expression of Donald Trump’s will.

Anyone who asserts otherwise is either a villain or a fool.

So if Bukele affirmatively refuses to repatriate Abrego Garcia, it will mean that Trump has told him not to.

At which point the Supreme Court will face a choice.

Surrender or escalation?..

Bill Kristol
@BillKristol
·
13m
Watching Trump and Bukele in the Oval Office just now made me feel physically ill.

He makes the skin crawl of any right thinking person anywhere. Oh America, what the hell have you done?

It’s the inevitable endpoint of woke leftism. The people will voluntarily elect right wing strongmen

The exact same thing will happen in the UK if we don’t reverse course on multiple crucial issues. Firstly, migration

How many times do the centrist dads need to be told this?

He doesn't make my skin crawl whatsoever.

I think most would quite like a bit of the Bukele approach within the British justice system, rather than it being populated with people who think a 'by no means bleeding-heart liberal' view is that people from ethnic and religious minorities should serve lower sentences for the same severity of crime.

What, being sent to a foreign prison at the whim of an erratic PM having committed no crime and having never been convicted of anything?

Absolutely fucking not. And if a lefty PM tried to do that to someone like you, I'd be out on the streets fighting your cause even if you would never return the favour.

(Your last bit is a blatant inverted lie. The purpose of the guidance was to try and mitigate the issue of minorities getting longer sentences for the same crimes).

Who has Bukele sent abroad for comitting no crime?

OH! I see.

"No crime" here is a bit of a trap by the Right as it is quite possible that the individual concerned has committed a crime. However Bukele and Trump are between them imprisoning a person who is not subject to a prison sentence.

Habeas Corpus is still a law in this country. Doubtless you'd see it repealed as a bleeding-heart woke lefty inconvenience.

Does habeus corpus have any relevance in a society which literally seeks to imprison white people more often than black and brown people, on the basis of their skin colour? No. It doesn’t

We live in a society that locks up black and brown people more often than white people. And a society that has the courage to recognise that and seek to do something about it. We should be proud of it.

I would say two things there David, are we locking mor eup because the law/legal system is racist or is it because they commit more crimes. Do you have any data as to what the reason is behind it.

Various studies suggest that, for the same crime, brown and black people get harsher punishments.