Making the news today....

[Mike Hill]

1 hour ago, Steve Bullman said:

Ahhhhh, I see they’re gearing up to take Tate down 🙄😀

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/17/extreme-misogyny-treated-as-terrorism-government/

 

She looks like the kind of woman who would post you an envelope containing four conifer droplets she found in her rosebed after you trimmed her 90 foot hedge.

 

Included in the envelope is a bill for the stamp and envelope. 

[Johnsond]

43 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

Yes you're correct but that has nothing to do with why the UK have to take on asylum seekers from distant countries.

?? Explain please because as I understand it asylum should be sought in the first safe country ?? 
Let’s be honest about this there are a lot of people crossing the channel who are not vulnerable or in danger but more for economic reasons than anything else. 

Edited Sunday at 19:47 by Johnsond

[Johnsond]

2 hours ago, peds said:

That's great news! He needed corking a loong time ago. Immeasurable damage he's done to young lads.

My wife has come home on numerous occasions complaining about the number of weirdo little teenage pricks in her classes parroting his toxic sludge. She nips it in the bud whenever she can, but it'd be best treated at the roots. 

But who decides which of the ideologies are harmful ?? Talk of silent prayer outside abortion conics being banned I see !. It’s ok supporting this crap when it suits or you agree with it but it’s a very slippery slope to go down. 

[peds]

I'd say encouraging rape and sexual abuse is a fairly harmful ideology in any sane person's mind, so I guess we can start there? It's still waaay at the top of that slippery slope you speak of, and I don't really think we need to go sliding too far down it to be honest. 

 

Definitely for the rapey stuff, yeah. I understand what point you are trying to make though, and yeah, obviously both sides are as bad as each other, but I don't think we'd need to start locking people up for saying such radical leftist ideas as giving free school meals to children, or providing basic housing and drug addiction services to homeless people, no questions asked. But as we all know, such dangerous socialist dreams as these can easily lead to re-education camps for the bourgeoisie and purges for non-party-thinking sorts of behaviour. But we should definitely keep an eye on it, as you say 👍

[Mesterh]

46 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

?? Explain please because as I understand it asylum should be sought in the first safe country ?? 
 

The internet is at your finger tips, they dont have to claim asylum in the first safe country they come to, its part of some international agreement/treaty.

I agree that most or maybe a lot of people are falsely claiming asylum, they should be sent back to where they came from and the country that they 'fled' from should have to pay some kind of penalty or fine to the UK to cover the cost.

 

You've mentioned plenty of times that the UK/US illegally invaded Iraq, should only the neighbouring countries have to deal with the fallout and us being an island and the US being a trillion miles away can just go HA, tough.

Yes, illegals and false claims tough, no entry, genuine cases OK maybe as long as we are only taking our fair share.

 

 

[peds]

The figures for how many settle along the way would be interesting to see. I suspect there's a good few lingering around Paris and Marseille and such. And although Paris is lovely, in its own way, I wouldn't want to live there either. I'd probably press on further north too.

[sime42]

57 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

But who decides which of the ideologies are harmful ?? Talk of silent prayer outside abortion conics being banned I see !. It’s ok supporting this crap when it suits or you agree with it but it’s a very slippery slope to go down. 

 

 

 

The moral consensus? Common sense would indicate that any ideology that promotes hatred of another group of people is harmful. For example hatred of Women, hatred of Women's right to chose, hatred of Non-Muslims, hatred of Muslims, hatred of Non-Whites, hatred of Immigrants, hatred of Christians, hatred of Transsexuals, hatred of Jews, hatred of Roma.....you get the idea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[peds]

Jeez, that sounds like quite a nice idea, really. Be good to give it a go 👍

[Johnsond]

2 hours ago, peds said:

Jeez, that sounds like quite a nice idea, really. Be good to give it a go 👍

Yep all so simple 🤷‍♂️

Be careful whet you wish for. 

 

[Johnsond]

2 hours ago, sime42 said:

 

 

 

The moral consensus? Common sense would indicate that any ideology that promotes hatred of another group of people is harmful. For example hatred of Women, hatred of Women's right to chose, hatred of Non-Muslims, hatred of Muslims, hatred of Non-Whites, hatred of Immigrants, hatred of Christians, hatred of Transsexuals, hatred of Jews, hatred of Roma.....you get the idea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do know there are existing legislation that covers all of that ?  it’s not though is it 42 “ the moral consensus” . All you’ve done is dumbed it down to the lowest level you could to try and make a point. Listen as was the case during the farce certain people will accept anything and question nothing, you think it’s wonderful I think it’s a dangerous path to follow. 🤷‍♂️we ain’t gonna agree and the team getting back together for some mutual back slapping support  won’t change much. Starmer is in for a while yet unfortunately.