Posted without comment, this is the camera angle of the shooting that Republicans are pointing to as suggesting the officer was hit by the car before opening fire.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Once again - people thinking about immigration aren't looking at how most immigrants arrive but those who arrive on a boat on a beach in Kent / East Sussex.
So immigration will be an issue for a long time while boats continue to arrive and Nigel Farage can continue talking about x00 arriving yesterday.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Two issues get elided in the 'immigration' question. The numbers coming in (which can be solved) is one question; the numbers and nature of those already lawfully here is another.
We shall I suppose find out what the public mean. The first is about border control. The second is the seedbed of fascism. The distinction matters
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Once again - people thinking about immigration aren't looking at how most immigrants arrive but those who arrive on a boat on a beach in Kent / East Sussex.
So immigration will be an issue for a long time while boats continue to arrive and Nigel Farage can continue talking about x00 arriving yesterday.
Trouble is, the hysteria has a hysteresis.
When x00 arrive in a day, it's news.
When 00 arrive for x days, it isn't news. But the folk memory remains.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
I never asked you. Did you oppose the bombing of Belgrade?
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Two issues get elided in the 'immigration' question. The numbers coming in (which can be solved) is one question; the numbers and nature of those already lawfully here is another.
We shall I suppose find out what the public mean. The first is about border control. The second is the seedbed of fascism. The distinction matters
Hence my question.
It's very clearly a defining issue for around a quarter of the electorate (which correlates somewhat with the standing of Reform in the polls). What's a bit less clear to me at least is how it will be seen if/when net immigration is back at a historically low level.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Once again - people thinking about immigration aren't looking at how most immigrants arrive but those who arrive on a boat on a beach in Kent / East Sussex.
So immigration will be an issue for a long time while boats continue to arrive and Nigel Farage can continue talking about x00 arriving yesterday.
Trouble is, the hysteria has a hysteresis.
When x00 arrive in a day, it's news.
When 00 arrive for x days, it isn't news. But the folk memory remains.
There've been, what, something in the order of 30,000 on small boats in the past year? (I may be out by a factor of 2 here but I think I'm order of magnitude right?) We get some days with zero, but we're getting a newsworthy average.
And eek is right - reducing overall immigration numbers will do nothing to change the visceral reaction to small boat arrivals.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Once again - people thinking about immigration aren't looking at how most immigrants arrive but those who arrive on a boat on a beach in Kent / East Sussex.
So immigration will be an issue for a long time while boats continue to arrive and Nigel Farage can continue talking about x00 arriving yesterday.
Trouble is, the hysteria has a hysteresis.
When x00 arrive in a day, it's news.
When 00 arrive for x days, it isn't news. But the folk memory remains.
There've been, what, something in the order of 30,000 on small boats in the past year? (I may be out by a factor of 2 here but I think I'm order of magnitude right?) We get some days with zero, but we're getting a newsworthy average.
And eek is right - reducing overall immigration numbers will do nothing to change the visceral reaction to small boat arrivals.
41,472, so you were pretty close. Very few right now because it’s winter, just 32 from one boat in the last week.
I haven't commented on the ICE shooting as I hadn't seen the footage but Sky have played the footage from two angles and I cannot understand how anyone can excuse the ICE officer
He may well have panicked, but his action was inexcusable
US really is the Wild West
Should the ICE officer have (repeatedly) shot the woman in the car? Probably not, but at the same time it's a confusing and difficult situation, and if he was hit by the vehicle, he may well have regarded his life as being in danger. A fuck up, but not necessarily a malicious one.
To my mind, the most serious issue is the deliberate withholding of medical aid after the shooting. That is inexcusable.
Confusing to Nicole? Confusing to the ICE agent on the left?
One ICE agent tells Nicole to leave. She reverses, she turns her wheels away, right hand down, and the ICE thug moves to the front of her car, weapon drawn, standing on the left hand side front of her car. He moves to the side. Was he even touched? I didn't see it. The second ICE agent moves away from the side of the car to get out of the line of fire from the shooter. One could argue once she has been shot in the face three times she fails to stop. That might be considered hostile whilst dying.
One could argue that an untrained immigration agent handling lethal weapons is a bad idea.
I suppose the ICE agent can claim he "felt" threatened which is a justified defence in the US. Here it would be most likely a murder charge and with an expensive barrister, he might get a manslaughter conviction.
Do we have evidence of an instruction to leave?
One channel I follow documents problems with US police, and one failure mode is when self-contradictory instructions are given, followed by the victim being abused or attacked.
I've seen on several reliable source channels that she was offered conflicting instructions including a direction to vacate the road to allow an ICE vehicle to pass.
"Leave" was my choice of verb, but other instructional synonyms to "go away" are available.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
Which dinosaur would you choose as a family pet?
A small herbivorous one from the Cretaceous (a late stage of evolution so likely quite intelligent and potentially trainable).
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
Wait until you hear what Trump did to those criminals who tried to assault/murder law enforcement officers on the 6th of January 2021.
The MAGA's have an answer for that:
1. They assert that Biden only won in 2020, due to massive voter fraud. Judges who have thrown out allegations of voter fraud, are obviously biased.
Oddly, the Republican State administration in Georgia was unable to unearth any evidence of the "voter fraud" that enabled Biden to carry the State, narrowly.
Even more oddly, the Republicans gained seats in the Senate and House, and won most State legislatures, despite all of this "voter fraud."
2. The January 6th protest was therefore justified. It was also entirely peaceful. It was the Democrats who incited the security forces to attack the protestors, and treated it as their "Reichstag Fire."
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
How many murdered by immigration officers in UK then
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
Which dinosaur would you choose as a family pet?
A small herbivorous one from the Cretaceous (a late stage of evolution so likely quite intelligent and potentially trainable).
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Come on.
The Woke Antifa Muslamic Terrorist Extremist Libtard violently impeded the passage of the ICE agent’s bullets
That’s straight up Terrorism Against Law Enforcement.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
I haven't commented on the ICE shooting as I hadn't seen the footage but Sky have played the footage from two angles and I cannot understand how anyone can excuse the ICE officer
He may well have panicked, but his action was inexcusable
US really is the Wild West
Should the ICE officer have (repeatedly) shot the woman in the car? Probably not, but at the same time it's a confusing and difficult situation, and if he was hit by the vehicle, he may well have regarded his life as being in danger. A fuck up, but not necessarily a malicious one.
To my mind, the most serious issue is the deliberate withholding of medical aid after the shooting. That is inexcusable.
Confusing to Nicole? Confusing to the ICE agent on the left?
One ICE agent tells Nicole to leave. She reverses, she turns her wheels away, right hand down, and the ICE thug moves to the front of her car, weapon drawn, standing on the left hand side front of her car. He moves to the side. Was he even touched? I didn't see it. The second ICE agent moves away from the side of the car to get out of the line of fire from the shooter. One could argue once she has been shot in the face three times she fails to stop. That might be considered hostile whilst dying.
One could argue that an untrained immigration agent handling lethal weapons is a bad idea.
I suppose the ICE agent can claim he "felt" threatened which is a justified defence in the US. Here it would be most likely a murder charge and with an expensive barrister, he might get a manslaughter conviction.
Do we have evidence of an instruction to leave?
One channel I follow documents problems with US police, and one failure mode is when self-contradictory instructions are given, followed by the victim being abused or attacked.
Where’s that article from the US about the ex-CIA/special forces guy? The one where he joins the police and gets berated for not being aggressive enough?
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
Which dinosaur would you choose as a family pet?
A small herbivorous one from the Cretaceous (a late stage of evolution so likely quite intelligent and potentially trainable).
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Two issues get elided in the 'immigration' question. The numbers coming in (which can be solved) is one question; the numbers and nature of those already lawfully here is another.
We shall I suppose find out what the public mean. The first is about border control. The second is the seedbed of fascism. The distinction matters
Also, it was an immigration answer, volunteered by poll respondents. The question was what should the government's first priority be. It would be interesting to see how they worded their answers which got classified under "immigration".
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
Shamima Begum is a weird case - firstly it's about the only thing I agree with Nigel Farage on and secondly we raised her and she should be held responsible for any crimes she's committed. Instead we didn't bother with the criminal prosecutions, took a quick way out and have now wasted years trying to justify it.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
Wait until you hear what Trump did to those criminals who tried to assault/murder law enforcement officers on the 6th of January 2021.
The MAGA's have an answer for that:
1. They assert that Biden only won in 2020, due to massive voter fraud. Judges who have thrown out allegations of voter fraud, are obviously biased.
Oddly, the Republican State administration in Georgia was unable to unearth any evidence of the "voter fraud" that enabled Biden to carry the State, narrowly.
Even more oddly, the Republicans gained seats in the Senate and House, and won most State legislatures, despite all of this "voter fraud."
2. The January 6th protest was therefore justified. It was also entirely peaceful. It was the Democrats who incited the security forces to attack the protestors, and treated it as their "Reichstag Fire."
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
Isn't ICE the fifth largest police organisation in the World? I heard that today but can't recall the source.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
Isn't ICE the fifth largest police organisation in the World? I heard that today but can't recall the source.
It seems unlikely. They only have 22,000 employees which is smaller than the Swiss police force.
I always thought the likes of AOC were being a bit silly when they called for dismantling ICE. I was wrong, can't see how anyone can trust them after all this.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
Isn't ICE the fifth largest police organisation in the World? I heard that today but can't recall the source.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
The murder victim clearly wasn't using her car as a weapon, but its entirely possible to do so without mounting the pavement.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
Many people see their house as their main investment - if it's getting more expensive, it means they are wealthier.
The impact of expensive property is a secondary issue that most people don't think about because either they bought decades ago so it doesn't impact them, or they bought more recently so the high prices keep them away from negative equity.
Wife and I are getting moderately serious about buying a nicer house. Our current house is worth about £170k, should sell fairly easily. The sort of houses we envisage living in long term are about £600k.
We've a fair wedge of cash saved up, including the value of our current house we can probably field about £370k in actual cash.
I'm not really keen on a mortgage of ~£250k, which is about what we'd need to fund a ~£600k house inc stamp, estate agents, solicitors etc. On paper we could afford it, but I run a small business, income can unpredictable, and failing to pay your mortgage gers unfunny fast.
So the logical thing is to go to an intermediate stage - buy a house at £450-500k, live there for three or four years, overpay the mortgage hard (if my business goes well, we might clear a £100k mortgage in 4 years) then move again. The problem is that this is a really expensive route, not least because we'll pay an extra £10-£15k stamp duty for the appalling crime of moving house twice rather than once.
I was musing on this the other night, and thought of a really easy fix; allow sellers to deduct the stamp duty their buyers pay from the stamp liability on their next house purchase.
You'd have to up the headline rates to make it work without losing revenue, but think about the benefits of a system like this. It doesn't matter how many times you move, your lifetime total stamp duty liability will effectively be set by the most expensive house you ever own.
No disimcentive to downsize - zero stamp to pay. Not agonising over going for a house you can't really afford because you don't want to buy in two bites. Shafts 2nd home purchasers without inventing any special rates (as they generally won't be selling a house to buy the second home, so will pay extra stamp compared to someone trading up).
The only wrinkle is with jointly owned houses being sold (eg after a divorce) - I suppose you'd have to split the stamp duty "credit" in the same proportion as the funds are settled.
Any good reason why the system doesn't work like this already? It seems a simple reform to bring in in a cost neutral way, and it would go a long way to reducing the damage stamp duty does to the efficient allocation of homes by the housing market.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
No just his usual pathetic attempts at whataboutery
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
Isn't ICE the fifth largest police organisation in the World? I heard that today but can't recall the source.
The Department of Homeland Security is the largest federal law enforcement agency in the US, I think. The Customs and Border Patrol (who have been seconded to work alongside ICE) are the second biggest. ICE is in third place, and still recruiting rapidly.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
When we fund a domestic immigration force a couple of times the size of the police force, recruit them in a semi random manner, give them a couple of months training, and allow them to shoot to kill ?
They might well be so.
A couple of times the size of the police force? ICE is a fraction of the federal police force, let alone police nationally.
Isn't ICE the fifth largest police organisation in the World? I heard that today but can't recall the source.
The Department of Homeland Security is the largest federal law enforcement agency in the US, I think. The Customs and Border Patrol (who have been seconded to work alongside ICE) are the second biggest. ICE is in third place, and still recruiting rapidly.
Seems crazy that the FBI isn't in that list, unless it falls under DHS.
Based on US dramas, you'd certainly think FBI should be up there towards the top.
Minneapolis story on R4 WATO at 13.27 finishing at 13.30. Obviously not as important as Lammy's,and I quote Sarah, "punishment by process" against the Palestine Action hunger strikers.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
His statement is at least true in part. The part which says that it is "hard to believe".
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the dead woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
The murder victim clearly wasn't using her car as a weapon, but its entirely possible to do so without mounting the pavement.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
Point taken, and of course I agree, Bart.
The video isn't entirely clear but I think the officer was on the pavement and fired the first shot at an angle. He may have been in the road but not directly in front of the car.
I think she was unwise to attempt to drive off, but I am not sure what I would have done in that situation.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
The whole 'priority listing' idea encourages a false conception of government. The task which government takes to itself, with mind blowingly gigantic powers and resource, is to run brilliantly well everything it has taken on itself to be responsible for.
Tesco's doesn't tell me that it is going to focus on gherkins, power drills, custard powder, lemons and milk. It does the whole thing very well, and if it didn't it would die.
Nancy Mace: "It appears that the ICE agent was struck by the car, and in the first video you just showed you can see the agent limping away after he fired shots. So I agree with President Trump and Secretary Noem that this was an act of domestic terrorism. These were, it appears, paid agitators."
Ron DeSantis: If a mob comes and surrounds your vehicle and threatens you, you have a right to flee for your safety. If you drive off and you hit one of these people, that's their fault. https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009129318535061756
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
The murder victim clearly wasn't using her car as a weapon, but its entirely possible to do so without mounting the pavement.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
Point taken, and of course I agree, Bart.
The video isn't entirely clear but I think the officer was on the pavement and fired the first shot at an angle. He may have been in the road but not directly in front of the car.
I think she was unwise to attempt to drive off, but I am not sure what I would have done in that situation.
Simply being ordered to get out, by a trigger-happy militia will make some people panic.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
The Housing Theory Of Everything says that items 1, 2, and 3 are all housing-related.
Also note that housing specifically is only a problem for the relative minority of the population, skewed disproportionally young, for whom it’s a massive issue.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
The murder victim clearly wasn't using her car as a weapon, but its entirely possible to do so without mounting the pavement.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
The madness is that in the USA, "law enforcement officers"* even if they are irrationality in fear of their life are justified in blowing away their victims.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Ron DeSantis: If a mob comes and surrounds your vehicle and threatens you, you have a right to flee for your safety. If you drive off and you hit one of these people, that's their fault. https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009129318535061756
DeSantis? That name sounds a bit Foreign. ICE agents to the Florida Governor's mansion next?
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
Which dinosaur would you choose as a family pet?
A small herbivorous one from the Cretaceous (a late stage of evolution so likely quite intelligent and potentially trainable).
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
Shamima Begum is a weird case - firstly it's about the only thing I agree with Nigel Farage on and secondly we raised her and she should be held responsible for any crimes she's committed. Instead we didn't bother with the criminal prosecutions, took a quick way out and have now wasted years trying to justify it.
One of the issues for me is this - do we have the evidence to convict her of the things we believe she has done? I'm not convinced we do. So bringing her back/allowing her back in order to lock her up in prison may well not work that well. I'd rather she stood trial in the place of her crimes, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
And she was likely groomed and is thus also, partially, a victim too. People have less sympathy for her than they do for victims of the other grooming story, but she didn't just decide to up and leave to join ISIS in a vacuum.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
The murder victim clearly wasn't using her car as a weapon, but its entirely possible to do so without mounting the pavement.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
Point taken, and of course I agree, Bart.
The video isn't entirely clear but I think the officer was on the pavement and fired the first shot at an angle. He may have been in the road but not directly in front of the car.
I think she was unwise to attempt to drive off, but I am not sure what I would have done in that situation.
Simply being ordered to get out, by a trigger-happy militia will make some people panic.
Well I was thinking, Sean, that if I had been sure it was a cop pointing the gun I would have stopped and stayed where I was. But an out of control ICE man? Think I might have slammed it into second, hit the gas and ducked.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
As I think I've said before, a hugely massive bad number being a bit smaller than a previous even huger massive bad number, although an improvement, doesn't solve the problem.
It's an attempt at a slight of hand like politicians mixing up the deficit and the national debt, and implying that merely *reducing* the deficit will reduce the debt.
We're not even remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands yet, never mind the net zero or below (very easy without forcing anyone to leave - cap visas to say 90% of the previous year's emigration figure, job done) which is what's needed to actually cut the pressure immigration is placing on housing and services.
Of course, if we don't solve the boats, part of the *political* problem is that they become a bigger and bigger part of the net figure. When we're letting in a net million people, 40k boat people are a drop in the ocean. Get legal immigration under control so the total is say 100k net, nearly half that net number is boat people, and it's a tiny issue no longer.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
Shamima Begum is a weird case - firstly it's about the only thing I agree with Nigel Farage on and secondly we raised her and she should be held responsible for any crimes she's committed. Instead we didn't bother with the criminal prosecutions, took a quick way out and have now wasted years trying to justify it.
One of the issues for me is this - do we have the evidence to convict her of the things we believe she has done? I'm not convinced we do. So bringing her back/allowing her back in order to lock her up in prison may well not work that well. I'd rather she stood trial in the place of her crimes, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
And she was likely groomed and is thus also, partially, a victim too. People have less sympathy for her than they do for victims of the other grooming story, but she didn't just decide to up and leave to join ISIS in a vacuum.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
He is no friend to Ukraine. Isn't that enough for you?
There is compelling evidence to suggest his actions don't always dispute he might be a Russian asset. There is evidence from Fiona Hill that in 2019 a quid pro quo exchange of influence regarding Venezuela and Ukraine was kite flown by Russia.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
You were defending Tim Pool, someone who was paid by Russia, saying his paid-for content was "middle-of-the-road and uncontroversial", when he said things like, "One of the greatest enemies of our nation [the US] right now is Ukraine."
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
As I think I've said before, a hugely massive bad number being a bit smaller than a previous even huger massive bad number, although an improvement, doesn't solve the problem.
It's an attempt at a slight of hand like politicians mixing up the deficit and the national debt, and implying that merely *reducing* the deficit will reduce the debt.
We're not even remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands yet, never mind the net zero or below (very easy without forcing anyone to leave - cap visas to say 90% of the previous year's emigration figure, job done) which is what's needed to actually cut the pressure immigration is placing on housing and services.
Of course, if we don't solve the boats, part of the *political* problem is that they become a bigger and bigger part of the net figure. When we're letting in a net million people, 40k boat people are a drop in the ocean. Get legal immigration under control so the total is say 100k net, nearly half that net number is boat people, and it's a tiny issue no longer.
To pick up on one point, I would say we are "remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands". Net immigration was 204k in 2025 and the number is falling. That's getting closer to, say, 90k, which would meet Cameron's description. To describe 2025's figure as merely "a bit smaller than a previous even huger massive bad number" is misleading and does not capture the absolutely huge drop in net immigration we've seen over the last 2 years.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
You were defending Tim Pool, someone who was paid by Russia, saying his paid-for content was "middle-of-the-road and uncontroversial", when he said things like, "One of the greatest enemies of our nation [the US] right now is Ukraine."
How was I “defending” Tim Pool? I specifically said that I was posting with no comment that this view of the incident was being used by Republicans to defend the shots being fired.
I have no idea of the context of the quote you give, was it specifically on the Tenet Media show he hosted?
He was unaware that Tenet Media had funding from RT, and was described as a victim at the time by Biden’s FBI.
Labour now pulling the business rate changes for pubs.
Is there anything the party is actually going to see through?
Are they going to come up with an even more complicated system that will require 6 million extra public sector workers to administor and so it ends up costing more overall than before?
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
You were defending Tim Pool, someone who was paid by Russia, saying his paid-for content was "middle-of-the-road and uncontroversial", when he said things like, "One of the greatest enemies of our nation [the US] right now is Ukraine."
How was I “defending” Tim Pool? I specifically said that I was posting with no comment that this view of the incident was being used by Republicans to defend the shots being fired.
I have no idea of the context of the quote you give, was it specifically on the Tenet Media show he hosted?
He was unaware that Tenet Media had funding from RT, and was described as a victim at the time by Biden’s FBI.
Pahlavi has called Iranians to come out on the streets at 8pm. Not sure what that is Greenwich Mean Time.
That was Franco's dilemma. He was on Greenwich Mean Time whilst his fellow fascist dictators were on European time. Synchronization of watches was a nightmare.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
Labour now pulling the business rate changes for pubs.
Is there anything the party is actually going to see through?
So yet again they’ve spent the political capital but not raised the money?
Yes
They really just should have said the finances were a lot worse than they expected because the Tories were bad, and we’re putting up income tax rates by 2% (or 4% while reducing -ee NI by 2%) for the duration of this Parliament.
The bad news would all have been out of the way 18 months ago, they’d have actually raised the money, and there wouldn’t be an increasing number of organised groups pissed off with Labour.
Bonus points if they actually dropped the tax rise back at the end of this Parliament, with a promise not to repeat next time.
It’s the most inept government ever, they really don’t have a clue how to actually govern.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
That's quite a low bar, though, not being Hitler.
It’s a very low bar.
Yet so many on the political left are failing to clear it.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
I'm sure murdering mothers of small children is generally entirely capable of reasoned explanation but I feel this attempt can be (and I am sure will be) improved upon. You are not quite at the 'locked and loaded and ready to win an argument with James O'Brien' stage yet.
Online MAGA are complaining at media reporting saying she was unarmed, on the grounds that she was in a car and a car can be used as a weapon, therefore she should be described as armed. They appear to think ICE should have free reign to shoot any driver.
One of the issues that both videos settle is that she was at no point off the road, nor was she trying to mount the pavement. That finishes the 'car as a weapon' argument.
After she had been shot dead she released the clutch in a hostile manner which could have put the Proud Boy/ Oath Keeper to the front of the car in danger.
But we aren't privy to what President Trump has seen, which is the ICE officer being "violently wilfully and viciously run over" by the woman. So crushed and mangled was he that "it is hard to believe he is still alive".
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
Reading comments on the videos, the MAGA bots are are already hard at work. She was a terrorist, threatening ICE agents, she should have been at home with her children, she’s a lesbo, she’s a bitch, she’s a whore etc.
And pretty much on every forum and media around. This is what people forget when they expect sanity to return or that we can avoid it here.
Most forums have a small army of bots ready to pile in on such occasions. We have to make do with William Glenn.
Poor sod needs help.
Are you forgetting poor Sandpit?
Post Brexit, @williamglenn was probably the most authoritative and informative pro-EU poster on here. Was that @williamglenn fired and replaced by this one?
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I’m definitely not “Pro-Trump”.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
That's quite a low bar, though, not being Hitler.
On the other hand the parallels are uncanny.
Really?
Trump is more of an addled figure head for the coterie of evil clowns around him.
The difference this is time round isn’t Trump, it’s that the 2025 lot realised they had missed a huge opportunity with his first administration. So they pitch their ideas as Working Towards The Big Orange.
While you watch what took place in Minneapolis, Minnesota, remember that when the Nazis and Hitler’s Gestapo killed innocent people in Germany, they too gaslit the public into believing those people were criminals.
The only way a government can get away with killing people is by selling the narrative that that killing was justified.
Believe what you see with your own eyes, not what Donald Trump is telling you you saw.
Comments
Trump just renewed the visa of the woman running the Russian propaganda operation.
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/lauren-chen-trump-administration-scores-visa-for-founder-russian-propaganda-outlet-tenet
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
1. Tackling immigration: 23%
2. Cost of living: 16%
3. Economy: 10%
4. NHS: 5%
5. Climate change: 3%
Results link in replies
https://x.com/YouGov/status/2008568826988839415
So immigration will be an issue for a long time while boats continue to arrive and Nigel Farage can continue talking about x00 arriving yesterday.
We shall I suppose find out what the public mean. The first is about border control. The second is the seedbed of fascism. The distinction matters
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
When x00 arrive in a day, it's news.
When 00 arrive for x days, it isn't news. But the folk memory remains.
It's very clearly a defining issue for around a quarter of the electorate (which correlates somewhat with the standing of Reform in the polls). What's a bit less clear to me at least is how it will be seen if/when net immigration is back at a historically low level.
As well as generating CSAM on Twitter, Grok is generating more explicit material on its website and app.
And eek is right - reducing overall immigration numbers will do nothing to change the visceral reaction to small boat arrivals.
"Leave" was my choice of verb, but other instructional synonyms to "go away" are available.
Perhaps this guy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albertadromeus
1. They assert that Biden only won in 2020, due to massive voter fraud. Judges who have thrown out allegations of voter fraud, are obviously biased.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/01/jack_smith_s_tyrannical_arrogance.html
Oddly, the Republican State administration in Georgia was unable to unearth any evidence of the "voter fraud" that enabled Biden to carry the State, narrowly.
Even more oddly, the Republicans gained seats in the Senate and House, and won most State legislatures, despite all of this "voter fraud."
2. The January 6th protest was therefore justified. It was also entirely peaceful. It was the Democrats who incited the security forces to attack the protestors, and treated it as their "Reichstag Fire."
They might well be so.
The Woke Antifa Muslamic Terrorist Extremist Libtard violently impeded the passage of the ICE agent’s bullets
That’s straight up Terrorism Against Law Enforcement.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
It would be interesting to see how they worded their answers which got classified under "immigration".
Speechless.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/j6/
The BBC are very hostile to Lammy in particular if he allows a Bobby Sands moment.
But my general point stands.
https://inthesetimes.com/article/ice-immigration-chicago-trump-broadview claims it has more funding than all but 12 national militaries.
Deliberately running over people stood in the road is also using your car as a weapon, pedestrians don't have to be on the pavement for it not to be the case.
Hypothetically if the ICE agent had been stood in the road and she'd deliberately aimed at him then that would be car as a weapon. However that did not happen, what we had is a fatal incident of 'gun as weapon'.
Many people see their house as their main investment - if it's getting more expensive, it means they are wealthier.
The impact of expensive property is a secondary issue that most people don't think about because either they bought decades ago so it doesn't impact them, or they bought more recently so the high prices keep them away from negative equity.
Wife and I are getting moderately serious about buying a nicer house. Our current house is worth about £170k, should sell fairly easily. The sort of houses we envisage living in long term are about £600k.
We've a fair wedge of cash saved up, including the value of our current house we can probably field about £370k in actual cash.
I'm not really keen on a mortgage of ~£250k, which is about what we'd need to fund a ~£600k house inc stamp, estate agents, solicitors etc. On paper we could afford it, but I run a small business, income can unpredictable, and failing to pay your mortgage gers unfunny fast.
So the logical thing is to go to an intermediate stage - buy a house at £450-500k, live there for three or four years, overpay the mortgage hard (if my business goes well, we might clear a £100k mortgage in 4 years) then move again. The problem is that this is a really expensive route, not least because we'll pay an extra £10-£15k stamp duty for the appalling crime of moving house twice rather than once.
I was musing on this the other night, and thought of a really easy fix; allow sellers to deduct the stamp duty their buyers pay from the stamp liability on their next house purchase.
You'd have to up the headline rates to make it work without losing revenue, but think about the benefits of a system like this. It doesn't matter how many times you move, your lifetime total stamp duty liability will effectively be set by the most expensive house you ever own.
No disimcentive to downsize - zero stamp to pay. Not agonising over going for a house you can't really afford because you don't want to buy in two bites.
Shafts 2nd home purchasers without inventing any special rates (as they generally won't be selling a house to buy the second home, so will pay extra stamp compared to someone trading up).
The only wrinkle is with jointly owned houses being sold (eg after a divorce) - I suppose you'd have to split the stamp duty "credit" in the same proportion as the funds are settled.
Any good reason why the system doesn't work like this already? It seems a simple reform to bring in in a cost neutral way, and it would go a long way to reducing the damage stamp duty does to the efficient allocation of homes by the housing market.
The Customs and Border Patrol (who have been seconded to work alongside ICE) are the second biggest.
ICE is in third place, and still recruiting rapidly.
Based on US dramas, you'd certainly think FBI should be up there towards the top.
So perhaps people should hang fire until he releases that footage. You wouldn't have thought he'd flat out lie about something as serious as this.
https://x.com/richard_aholmes/status/2009218766945587482
Will the government be trying to intercept it, or at least asking the Americans still around to help out?
The part which says that it is "hard to believe".
The video isn't entirely clear but I think the officer was on the pavement and fired the first shot at an angle. He may have been in the road but not directly in front of the car.
I think she was unwise to attempt to drive off, but I am not sure what I would have done in that situation.
Tesco's doesn't tell me that it is going to focus on gherkins, power drills, custard powder, lemons and milk. It does the whole thing very well, and if it didn't it would die.
Our conception of government should be the same.
Nancy Mace: "It appears that the ICE agent was struck by the car, and in the first video you just showed you can see the agent limping away after he fired shots. So I agree with President Trump and Secretary Noem that this was an act of domestic terrorism. These were, it appears, paid agitators."
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3mbw3x5cdms2o
Ron DeSantis: If a mob comes and surrounds your vehicle and threatens you, you have a right to flee for your safety. If you drive off and you hit one of these people, that's their fault.
https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009129318535061756
Poor sod needs help.
Also note that housing specifically is only a problem for the relative minority of the population, skewed disproportionally young, for whom it’s a massive issue.
* Technically ICE aren't law enforcement.
https://chasmosaurs.com/2023/05/17/vintage-dinosaur-art-how-to-keep-dinosaurs-part-1/
https://chasmosaurs.com/2023/06/08/vintage-dinosaur-art-how-to-keep-dinosaurs-part-2/
And she was likely groomed and is thus also, partially, a victim too. People have less sympathy for her than they do for victims of the other grooming story, but she didn't just decide to up and leave to join ISIS in a vacuum.
He could have been anybody.
@Sandpit still needs to square the circle of being both pro-Trump and pro-Ukraine. That Venn diagram appears remarkably similar to two non dissecting circles.
I just don’t think he’s Hitler, and understand why people voted for him, which is a long way away from being a supporter.
It's an attempt at a slight of hand like politicians mixing up the deficit and the national debt, and implying that merely *reducing* the deficit will reduce the debt.
We're not even remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands yet, never mind the net zero or below (very easy without forcing anyone to leave - cap visas to say 90% of the previous year's emigration figure, job done) which is what's needed to actually cut the pressure immigration is placing on housing and services.
Of course, if we don't solve the boats, part of the *political* problem is that they become a bigger and bigger part of the net figure. When we're letting in a net million people, 40k boat people are a drop in the ocean. Get legal immigration under control so the total is say 100k net, nearly half that net number is boat people, and it's a tiny issue no longer.
Is there anything the party is actually going to see through?
https://x.com/nasaspaceflight/status/2009129900637143450
There is compelling evidence to suggest his actions don't always dispute he might be a Russian asset. There is evidence from Fiona Hill that in 2019 a quid pro quo exchange of influence regarding Venezuela and Ukraine was kite flown by Russia.
I have no idea of the context of the quote you give, was it specifically on the Tenet Media show he hosted?
He was unaware that Tenet Media had funding from RT, and was described as a victim at the time by Biden’s FBI.
I posted upthread a Wired analysis of the sort of thing Pool was saying for money: https://www.wired.com/story/influencers-tenet-benny-johnson-tim-pool-russia-propaganda-videos/ You call that "middle-of-the-road".
8pm is presumably shortly after the last prayers of the day.
https://x.com/ziayusufuk/status/2009200669987586318
The bad news would all have been out of the way 18 months ago, they’d have actually raised the money, and there wouldn’t be an increasing number of organised groups pissed off with Labour.
Bonus points if they actually dropped the tax rise back at the end of this Parliament, with a promise not to repeat next time.
It’s the most inept government ever, they really don’t have a clue how to actually govern.
Yet so many on the political left are failing to clear it.
Trump is more of an addled figure head for the coterie of evil clowns around him.
The difference this is time round isn’t Trump, it’s that the 2025 lot realised they had missed a huge opportunity with his first administration. So they pitch their ideas as Working Towards The Big Orange.
While you watch what took place in Minneapolis, Minnesota, remember that when the Nazis and Hitler’s Gestapo killed innocent people in Germany, they too gaslit the public into believing those people were criminals.
The only way a government can get away with killing people is by selling the narrative that that killing was justified.
Believe what you see with your own eyes, not what Donald Trump is telling you you saw.
https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/2009214648382349514?s=20