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.
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?
"Liz Truss Trump has been proven right about pretty much everything Net zero, trade with China, lockdown, mass migration: all have been disastrous" (£)
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
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.
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.
Something very wrong it that photo. There appears to be actual food on the tray. During my enforced residency of the local hospital the evening supper was rather different. One memorable occasion a minestrone soup arrived that I swear looked like the washing up water from someone washing up minestrone bowls. Supper was at turns either inedible or minuscule.
Rant over, just jealous. I hope whatever is going on is swiftly resolved.
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.
Scoop: The UK has signaled to the EU that it's open to accept the dynamic alignment of rules on agrifood products + supervision of the ECJ over the SPS deal it wants to negotiate. Big shift in UK position.
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.
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
Usually the Canadian Conservatives pile up votes in constituencies they already hold, which is why they've won the popular vote at the last two elections without taking office. But maybe it'll be different this time.
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.
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?
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?
"Manchester bomber’s brother ‘should be isolated even if he goes mad’
Ian Acheson, a former prison governor and expert on extremism, has made the claims after Hashem Abedi attacked prison officers at HMP Frankland last weekend" (£)
"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."
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?
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.
Might be a good idea to Rejoin the EU then so you can enjoy that Lebensraum in the East.
Personally, I am happy here. It's a lovely country and that's why a lot of other people want to move here. They want to live as we do.
Do you seriously still not get this???
They DON’T want to live as we do. They DON’T want western values, legalised homosexuality, female freedom, state secularism. They want western benefits and wages while importing THEIR values
On this @Leon, we agree. People allowed into this country must at the very least respect our values and the rights of those who live here, women in particular. If they want to live otherwise or they think that their religion says otherwise they should not be welcome. We owe that to people already here and their rights. And we must stand up for those rights.
If we're only to let those who respect women into the country, Leon is going to have difficulty returning from his current trip. And Trump's state visit is definitely going to have to be cancelled!
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.
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?
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.)
"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."
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?
ex partner, and she had been using the ipads to post abuse about him online it seems
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.
I've uploaded the very rough first draft of my essay on Hyperliberalism: specifically, a review of the John Gray book "The New Leviathans", which introduces and explains the term. It is a first draft and will need one or two passes to tidy it up. If you want to be a prereader, please "like" this comment and I'll add you to the toilets.
"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."
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.”
"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."
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.
"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."
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!
"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."
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?
Have you thought about not coming back? We'll have a whip round so you can stay in Islamic former Russian dependencies if you like. I'm sure we can raise more than enough.
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.
"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."
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?
Congressman Ritchie Torres’ office tells me that in response to the Oval Office meeting between President Trump and President @nayibbukele of El Salvador, Torres is introducing the “RESCUE Act.”
Rescue: Repatriation of Expelled Sovereign Citizens and Unjustly Exiled Act
Under the bill, if a U.S. court orders the return of someone wrongfully deported—whether a U.S. citizen, green card holder, or noncitizen who had lawful status at the time (including asylees, refugees, TPS holders, Special Immigrant Juveniles, Deferred Action recipients, or those with pending bona fide asylum or immigration cases)—and a foreign government refuses to comply, the United States is required to take action.
The bill requires the U.S. to suspend diplomatic ties, foreign aid, and visas for that country’s government officials and their immediate family members until the person is returned to the United States.
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?
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.”
Where to? This is common all over the Anglophone world. And I don't speak foreign. FWIW, I've been on the wrong end of this in the public sector.
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 .
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 .
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.
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.
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 .
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 .
"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
...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...
The "Rooney Rule" is an American term which the Telegraph stenographers got from the Internet. the British term is "positive action" which has been in the UK for at least thirteen years. But using race as a tiebreaker is illegal.
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.
Have you thought about not coming back? We'll have a whip round so you can stay in Islamic former Russian dependencies if you like. I'm sure we can raise more than enough.
Oooh. Please. I want to go to North Korea but can’t get a Gazette commission
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?
Harvard University President Alan Garber has rejected the Trump Admin's demand to prohibit protests and cut DEI programs to receive funding: "[Harvard] will not negotiate over its independence or constitutional rights." https://x.com/DisavowTrump20/status/1911850688000254311
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?
It’s a difficult one because people do subconsciously recruit people of their same race so in theory if you have a multicultural team doing the hiring you should get a more objective hiring outcome. It’s getting to that point which is difficult.
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
Yes- most of you far right nutters offer the same contempt. It's why you are not widely lived and why you will fail, as you should. Still, plenty of horse meat butchers in Osh... off you go.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
The slope isn't slippery; the frog isn't gradually getting boiled. Within its first hundred days the Trump administration has openly asserted the right/ power to seize and imprison anyone— including political dissidents, including citizens— and deprive them of any legal recourse at all.
If only there was a recent historical example where people deemed to be inferior were concentrated in facilities built in other countries. Then we could work out how to assess this situation.
I think there are several of those, including several involving Usonia, and several slightly further back involving almost every "advanced" country.
However I have enough complications of my own around here today, involving my inability to be able to take a treatment involving an injection into my eyeball that I have not sufficiently explained yet but which may be as simple as being very flinchy due to a very uncomfortable lack of sleep last night due possibly to an argumentative insulin pump for various reasons that happen occasionally, and a late rescheduling of appointment time.
So good evening all, genuinely - and sympathy for @TSE .
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?
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.
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.
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?
No point asking the US Marshals to enforce a Court order as they are under the DOJ which is full MAGA. Maybe the Supreme Court Police could be used, but this is unlikely as we could see bits of the US government fighting one another. My hunch is the SCOTUS will simply buckle, and that will be the end of the USA as a democracy.
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?
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.
We could just ignore wind-up merchants trying to “own the libs”, but then we’ve seen what happened in the US.
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.
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?
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.
Once the Clacton Panto has been mentally relocated to the end of the Clacton Pier, it helps a little .
The local version in Ashfield is a little more annoying, as it impinges on Planet Normal.
My photo quota (I think - that is satirical and I do not recognise the action men. The one on the right rings a small bell.):
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 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?
Yes, I feel like England is still a nice place to live for a middle class, white man, and they/I enjoy an amount of privilege that fifty years ago would have been considered perfectly normal. But the country is changing, and soon "we" won't be in charge any more and so I think the comparison with late 60s Rhodesia is apt. The white/Europeans there were basking in the twilight of their gilded lives, knowing in the back of their mind that it was all going to end soon, and that's how I feel about England.
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.
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 don't post as often as I used to (among other things getting married again on Wednesday, hooray), but I think the current system still works well. There are one or two posters who I tend to skim past (maybe they skim me too), but that's no more of a problem than the newsstand having papers that I don't usually read. PB still works well IMO, giving a flow of news and opinion from people with a common interest in how we're governed.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sentencing has been shown to have a racial bias, with ethnic minorities getting harsher punishments for equivalent crimes.
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.
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.
Sentencing has been shown to have a racial bias, with ethnic minorities getting harsher punishments for equivalent crimes.
How much would it cost to have pre-sentence reports for everyone? What percentage get them now?
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...
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?
Yes, I feel like England is still a nice place to live for a middle class, white man, and they/I enjoy an amount of privilege that fifty years ago would have been considered perfectly normal. But the country is changing, and soon "we" won't be in charge any more and so I think the comparison with late 60s Rhodesia is apt. The white/Europeans there were basking in the twilight of their gilded lives, knowing in the back of their mind that it was all going to end soon, and that's how I feel about England.
I am a human. I feel like England is a nice place to live for humans. You talk of “we”, but my idea of “we” is not based on other people matching my skin tone or my gender, it’s not based on whether someone was born near or far.
Maybe it, the pleasantness of England, will end, but if it does, it won’t end because immigrants exist and some people’s ancestors worshipped a different sky god. No, it will end because racists and misogynist sociopaths gain power through lies and propaganda, as has happened in the US.
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.
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.
A dystopian few pages to catch up on this evening. But not as dystopian as my day.
The car got crunched by a slow moving lorry turning right out of a garage. Borderline write off / reparable, because repairs these days cost so much and the car is 6 years old.
But what makes it a right bugger is we’re in France, the insurance doesn’t provide a courtesy car abroad let alone repatriation, so I’m having to leave the old smashed up car at the body shop awaiting an estimate, and in the meantime had to buy a week of last-minute car hire and 3 overpriced easyJet tickets home this Sunday, and then one of us will have to fly back out in a couple of months to pick up the car, if it gets repaired.
Second time I’ve had a car accident abroad (I’ve never had one in Britain). To be avoided.
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.
Not this laughable nonsense again. Trump has shown us the light. Trump has shown us what happens when the radical right gain power. Freedom of speech is rapidly disappearing in the US, with law firms and universities forced to kowtow to Trump’s whims, with museums and websites removing mentions of women or black people, with books getting banned, with the media under pressure. The real threat to free speech comes from the radical right.
A dystopian few pages to catch up on this evening. But not as dystopian as my day.
The car got crunched by a slow moving lorry turning right out of a garage. Borderline write off / reparable, because repairs these days cost so much and the car is 6 years old.
But what makes it a right bugger is we’re in France, the insurance doesn’t provide a courtesy car abroad let alone repatriation, so I’m having to leave the old smashed up car at the body shop awaiting an estimate, and in the meantime had to buy a week of last-minute car hire and 3 overpriced easyJet tickets home this Sunday, and then one of us will have to fly back out in a couple of months to pick up the car, if it gets repaired.
Second time I’ve had a car accident abroad (I’ve never had one in Britain). To be avoided.
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 don't post as often as I used to (among other things getting married again on Wednesday, hooray), but I think the current system still works well. There are one or two posters who I tend to skim past (maybe they skim me too), but that's no more of a problem than the newsstand having papers that I don't usually read. PB still works well IMO, giving a flow of news and opinion from people with a common interest in how we're governed.
Congratulations! I hope that you and her and her will be very happy together...
Comments
So Monday night's Nazi night......?
Sorry my mistake
https://x.com/PhilipWegmann/status/1911869267164930395
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.
Rant over, just jealous. I hope whatever is going on is swiftly resolved.
Funny how these Brexit Tories are so obsessed with sovereignty but seem happy to hand that over to Trump .
Must get my eye test booked…
* she never shuts up about it these days and appears to be basically include everything.
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.
Apparently she's very good in her Field.
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.
Ian Acheson, a former prison governor and expert on extremism, has made the claims after Hashem Abedi attacked prison officers at HMP Frankland last weekend" (£)
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/hashem-abedi-extreme-custody-hmp-frankland-96cjhnpb9
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.
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.)
"Chicken sees-a salad."
My coat, thank you ..
Thought climate change was a hoax.
Now thinks net zero is pointless.
Charletan.
I hope she does not have any tattoos.
I have not looked at either the Telegrunt, or Mumsnet.
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.”
Police must be so much better resourced under Labour than the Tories. Good work chaps!
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.
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
@yashar
NEWS
Congressman Ritchie Torres’ office tells me that in response to the Oval Office meeting between President Trump and President
@nayibbukele
of El Salvador, Torres is introducing the “RESCUE Act.”
Rescue: Repatriation of Expelled Sovereign Citizens and Unjustly Exiled Act
Under the bill, if a U.S. court orders the return of someone wrongfully deported—whether a U.S. citizen, green card holder, or noncitizen who had lawful status at the time (including asylees, refugees, TPS holders, Special Immigrant Juveniles, Deferred Action recipients, or those with pending bona fide asylum or immigration cases)—and a foreign government refuses to comply, the United States is required to take action.
The bill requires the U.S. to suspend diplomatic ties, foreign aid, and visas for that country’s government officials and their immediate family members until the person is returned to the United States.
FWIW, I've been on the wrong end of this in the public sector.
"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."
The white population of Southern Rhodesia was 75 000 in 1945, and treble that by the mid 1960s.
£5k should do it. Knock yerself out
https://x.com/DisavowTrump20/status/1911850688000254311
@Mexicanpete is absolutely right.
“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
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.
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.
However I have enough complications of my own around here today, involving my inability to be able to take a treatment involving an injection into my eyeball that I have not sufficiently explained yet but which may be as simple as being very flinchy due to a very uncomfortable lack of sleep last night due possibly to an argumentative insulin pump for various reasons that happen occasionally, and a late rescheduling of appointment time.
So good evening all, genuinely - and sympathy for @TSE .
The local version in Ashfield is a little more annoying, as it impinges on Planet Normal.
My photo quota (I think - that is satirical and I do not recognise the action men. The one on the right rings a small bell.):
Maybe it, the pleasantness of England, will end, but if it does, it won’t end because immigrants exist and some people’s ancestors worshipped a different sky god. No, it will end because racists and misogynist sociopaths gain power through lies and propaganda, as has happened in the US.
The car got crunched by a slow moving lorry turning right out of a garage. Borderline write off / reparable, because repairs these days cost so much and the car is 6 years old.
But what makes it a right bugger is we’re in France, the insurance doesn’t provide a courtesy car abroad let alone repatriation, so I’m having to leave the old smashed up car at the body shop awaiting an estimate, and in the meantime had to buy a week of last-minute car hire and 3 overpriced easyJet tickets home this Sunday, and then one of us will have to fly back out in a couple of months to pick up the car, if it gets repaired.
Second time I’ve had a car accident abroad (I’ve never had one in Britain). To be avoided.