Guest essay by Eric Worrall
British mainstream media paint a picture of almost universal support for climate action and overwhelming public hostility towards President Trump. But this is not the complete story.
Trump UK protests: Why environmental groups are protesting ‘climate vandal’ US president
‘Those who are already vulnerable and powerless are suffering the most under the climate-denier-in-chief’
Josh Gabbatiss
Science CorrespondentAs tens of thousands gathered in London to protest the visit of Donald Trump, among them were protesters calling out the US president’s less than exemplary record on the environment.
Branding Mr Trump a “climate wrecker” and a “climate vandal”, green groups object particularly to his withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement – a move scientists say has put global security at risk.
“It does often get lost in the more immediate human rights abuses, but if Trump succeeds in derailing international climate action the consequences of that are going to be unthinkable,” Claire James from the Campaign against Climate Change told The Independent.
“The planet is really at a tipping point at the moment. Scientists are warning ever more urgently that we need to act, and we don’t have time to hang around while Trump tries a last ditch effort to rescue fossil fuels.”
…
Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who has presided over a massive surge in violent crime and terrorism, and whom President Trump has repeatedly publicly criticised, just suppressed a large pro Trump rally by threatening to arrest anyone who showed up.
‘Free Speech Is Dead’ – Police in Khan’s London BAN Pro-Trump Rally at U.S. Embassy
Jack Montgomery
14 Jul 2018Police in Sadiq Khan’s London have used the Public Order Act to prevent a rally in support of U.S. President Donald Trump outside the American embassy, despite permitting a large, ill-tempered anti-Trump rally on Friday.
Protestors attending the ‘Welcome Trump’ event had planned to gather outside the embassy and march from there to Whitehall, where they would have joined in with a separate ‘Free Tommy Robinson’ event in support of the activist and independent journalist who was recently imprisoned for contempt of court after reporting on a grooming gang trial.
But the Metropolitan Police Force, which answers to a large extent to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, used the Public Order Act to impose a raft of restrictions on both groups of protesters which made this impossible — despite allowing far larger anti-Trump protests at which at least six people were arrested to go ahead on Saturday, with demonstrators carrying signs emblazoned with harsh profanity and messages such as “Die Trump Die”.
…
Read more: https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/07/14/police-khans-london-ban-pro-trump-rally-u-s-embassy/
Why would anyone use their political authority to suppress a peaceful political rally to welcome President Trump to Britain? Why would those same authorities tolerate violent green anti-Trump protests?
What the British establishment is desperate to conceal and suppress, in my opinion, is the scale of the populist British uprising. British swamp creatures don’t want anyone, including Britons themselves, to learn just how many people in the UK admire President Trump’s heroic effort to drain the Washington Swamp.
My evidence is the number of people who voted Brexit. In 2016 the majority of Britons, over seventeen million people voted to leave the European Union, despite the utmost efforts by greens and establishment politicians to terrify the British public into voting for the UK to remain part of the European Union.
The response from the British establishment has been nothing short of brutal. Britain is being repeatedly rocked by increasingly heavy handed efforts by the establishment to keep the green left nexus in power, and to defy the will of the British People by retaining strong ties with the deep green European Union. Efforts range from intimidating journalists, through imprisonment and blatant judicial mistreatment of a journalist who opposes government policy, to this latest outrage, the casual suppression of a peaceful British Trump supporter rally.
A few years ago, actions like the suppression of a peaceful welcome march in support of the President of a close ally would have been unthinkable. Today British government suppression of free speech and freedom of assembly is almost unremarkable, against the growing list of outrageous political attacks against what Britons used to think were their freedoms.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Welcome to democracy UK style. After this debacle we are now back to our political leaders trying to find a way to foist a new referendum on the people to overturn the vote to leave the European Union. All this independent thought is so bad for people and we should just do as we are instructed.
Andy in Epsom
“No deal is better than a bad deal” – Theresa May. If memory serves.
She’s been told by David Davis (her former chief Brexit negotiator) Boris Johnson (her former foreign secretary) and Donald Trump, the deal is bad. Both Davis and Johnson have resigned over the issue.
Even most remainers are up in arms about it.
What the hell is the woman playing at?
Good question.
How about this . She ensures such a bad deal that when it comes to vote on whether to accept it or not, no one on either side will say yes.
This then leads to an opening for a second referendum .
No.
It leads to a no deal brexit.
I wish!
Absolutely no chance of that happening under ÀNY of the political parties in the House of Commons.
But the more I see of the people and media that hate Trump, the more I admire him.
“I wish!”
Are you sure? You are aware of the issues related to trying to deal with the EU as a third country with no bilateral trade agreements?
But the more I see of the people and media that hate Trump, the more I admire him.
The closer you are to the target, the more flack you get.
She isn’t playing, it’s not a game to the the cultural marxists, it is an all out drive to all or nothing now their world is collapsing all around them,
We in the west are at the point where their unblinking drive forward is being done to humiliate us, break our will, true soviet style.
They want us to kick off rag taggle so they can demonstrate their power, and create the fear of them that they now desire, nothing, i mean nothing short of mass uprising will get in the way of the great project, and the browning of the war mongering white races.
+100
The EU has nothing to lose and everything to win by holding out for total capitulation
If they play nice everyone else will leave.
And they will be a bunch of bureaucrats with no income and no pension and nothing to run and no expense accounts.
Leo Smith
Which was my point when the referendum result was announced.
The EU will make this as difficult and as expensive, both in financial and political terms, as possible. They want any other country considering jumping ship to be scared to do so.
But much like the oft announced prediction that the UK would crumble following the vote, which it didn’t, the real fear for the EU is in ten years time when the UK is doing well despite their efforts to scupper us.
That’s when the rats will begin to abandon ship.
Leo Smith :
YES ! If BRITAIN escapes then the EU will have nothing but
HUGE BILLS and VERY EXPENSIVE ELECTRICITY in most places!
and NO BRITAIN to pay for them and GERMANY becoming their Landlord!
Hasn’t Germany already tried that…to become the landlord of Europe…on several occasions?
And weren’t there wars fought to see that it didn’t happen?
Now the Green Blob is trying to do what Adolph couldn’t complete.
Adolph lost thanks to the expense of hosting the Olympics causing a shortage of available funding for his War Machine.
Hopefully the Green Blob looses its funding as well and Europe can get back to the business of being productive.
There are many more problems with the EU than the climate obsession. This very website has one, in the form of the GDPR notice. Rampant bureaucracy threatens to bring it down anyway.
It’s possible that May thinks that she’s invulnerable. If it comes to a vote of no confidence (that will require a general election) she knows that the regular voting populace knows (sorry about the repetition) that the only current alternative, the Labour Party, is so Commie that they have DECLARED that they intend to ruin the country! So, given that there are *currently* no real alternatives to the Tories, she’s safe and comfy and the rest of the UK can STFU. Note the ‘currently’ – if the UKIP party can get as organised as they were for the BREXIT vote, the ordinary people may stand a chance. If there’s enough support for a real alternative party (I’m not counting the LibDems), then May could be on shaky ground, and the sensible MPs in Parliament (I assume there ARE some) could stage a valid revolt and get BREXIT back on track.
May doesn’t think that. In fact she doesn’t think. She does exactly what she is told.
She was selected precisely because of her two features – ambition and total lack of competence. She could be relied upon to rely upon her masters.
She is doing what she was told to do. To the letter. If her usefulness ends, she will be rewarded, pour encourager les autres with some sinecure make believe job that requires no work but brings in a lot and probably given an Honour by the
QueenEstablishment.Competence or concience?
Both – neither competence nor conscience.
Even worse, the Establishment, having given terrorists’ blanket pardons, are chasing Armed Forces veterans through the courts in the name of fairness and even-handedness – UK Gov sits back and allows it to happen 🙁
She was selected precisely because of her two features – ambition and total lack of competence. She could be relied upon to rely upon her masters.
Change to he, and you have Obama. Oh wait, there was one other feature, the most important one……
She is an EU/establishment apparatchik puppet, doing what she was appointed to do.
Delay and frustrate the process whilst the propaganda machine was supposed to change peoples minds, then have another referendum and stay in.
Unfortunately the establishment is as incompetent as it is ruthless, and they over egged the project Fear stuff, and when the EU apparatchiks started crowing, British resolve stiffened.
The opinion polls showed that a second referendum was very unpopular, even amongst those that had voted remain.
So PLAN B was to move Project Fear to highlight spurious issues and claim that the government was so incompetent that we couldn’t leave right now, we needed a transitional deal, and then that moved to become ‘and the transitional deal will be effectively indefinite’.
Plan B was created behind closed doors without reference to the Cabinet, or to the Brexit committee, and presented as a fait accompli to the Tories at Chequers. It was a simple ultimatum, support me, or walk home and see the opposition in power.
Since then top minsiters have resigned, letters of no confidence have been passed to the 22 committee, and te torioes are waiting to see who blinks first.
Amendments to the plan B have been tabled and have been accepted. the EU looks like even though the plan was effectively written by them, they wont agree – they want more.
However article 50 has been triggered, and deal; or no deal we legally SHOULD leave early next year.
Unless we apply for, and every nation in the EU votes to, grant us an extension.
Kep the beers cool and the popcorn handy.
Britain is in a state of undeclared Civil war and its government is being interfered with by a foreign power – the EU.
WE may call on NATO to defend us yet.
Progressives NEVER play fair. They don’t want to play fair they want to win always. That’s why progressives are not social animals and don’t have friends. They are dictatorial and everyone is the enemy. They will ALWAYS stab you in the back when you are no longer needed. Transgenders, gays, lesbiennes, etc and other minorities should be warned because progressives hate Free people.
Jordan Peterson Rats and Morality
https://youtu.be/FqTZCU_ViHg
Progressives Know Better
Leo, don’t you see the irony of your statement? Don’t you see the endless parade of comments here filled with condemnation for progressives’ ideas, and the certainty that they are wrong?
Geez, we are all just people! We are all fallible, we all reason poorly sometimes. Sure, progressives think they are right. So do conservatives. Maybe if we could talk to each other without throwing insults back and forth, we might come to realize that each group has something of value to say. Maybe if we understood each other’s values a little bit better, we could see the merit in them even if we don’t agree. This is the realization I’ve come to over the last several years, and I sure wish I knew how I could share it with others. Try reading Righteous Minds, by Jonathan Haidt – that’s a start. Or watch a video.
A sane voice. Thanks. Logic and evidence don’t presuade most people unfortunately Kristi. We’re all looking at the same things but through different ideological prisms – except for the few who’ve managed to escape the blinding effect of ideology on the mind – and the result is that we perceive those same things very differently indeed. And it’s like “never the twain shall meet” . . It’s as if systems of ideas, or simply clusters of prejudice, colonise the mind and prevent it from seeing evidence or logic that threatens it/them. We need our education systems to develop means to inoculate coming generations against this divisive tendency of humans to cleave passionately, blindly and dangerously to sets of ideas. Good luck with your efforts though.
Jim, I don’t think anyone is totally free of the effects of their ideology enough to reason correctly all the time. I absolutely agree that our educational systems need to address the problem.
Geez, we are all just people!
Duh.
We are all fallible, we all reason poorly sometimes. Maybe if we could talk to each other without throwing insults back and forth, we might come to realize that each group has something of value to say.
The liberals kooks have been pounding relentlessly at everyone for decades via media, academia, entertainment and politicians. We already know exactly what their values (or not) are. Tried to reason at first — it never worked & actually got much worse as a result. They took advantage of our tolerance and we fell for it.
The Founders said that true democracy has to be refreshed by revolution at intervals……….
So you know what my values are? Why would you think the media, etc. reflect that?
In what ways did you try to reason? I missed that. Does “reason” mean convince? What about compromise, did you try that, too?
Who woulda thought, a concern tr0ll promoting “Righteous Minds”? Kristi, I wasn’t in the UK before the Brexit vote, did they talk before the vote? Did the vote decide the matter? Now, when the problem is two years of “talk” to avoid actually putting the vote into effect, you want them to talk some more?
In my long experience, Progressive talk amounts to telling me what’s best for me. Progs do not listen outside the echo chamber. Example- you tell us “this is the realization I’ve come to over the last several years….” What if your “realization” is mistaken? OR are you just here to “share” your realization with us? Are our thoughts to be considered before you set your “realization” in granite? Please share your thoughts.
Paul, my realization was a personal one. I can’t to understand better the basis of conservative values and appreciate them. Could I be mistaken that through greater understanding others might go through the same experience? Sure. I don’t know how to answer the “what if…” question.
Of course your thoughts are to be considered, that’s the whole point. I understand that the left has a lot to answer for. I despise Hillary Clinton for referring to the right as “deplorable.” I know there is a lot of narrow thinking on the left, I’ve experienced it for decades and never been comfortable with it. I believe the state of academia is terrible for the country (speaking of America). We need conservative voices to help educate our youth and give them a different perspective. The media are too biased, both to the right and the left.
It seems to me neither “side” is much good at resisting the echo chamber.
None of my beliefs are set in granite. That is my other point – they have changed.
So, I’m a concern tr0ll? What is that? I want something better for the nation and humanity, so I get a special insulting label? If you are going to start your comments to me with an insult, why should I waste time on sharing my thoughts with you? Please do not insult me again if you want me to give you a serious, respectful reply.
Robertvd, that’s just silly. I grew up in a city that’s jam-packed with progressives, and I can assure you they have plenty of friends. Even conservative ones.
What do you have to say about the old fashioned liberals who aren’t fooled by the tenets of progressivism or CO2 pollution (and are now lumped in with ultra-conservative factions)?
Do you know any of us?
Pop, I’m not sure who you’re talking about, but you may be referring to my best friend.
Just wondered what the penalty charge will be from Brussels for daring to leave the EU and causing trouble. Will it be a double payment next year and a double immigrant allotment?
And the rest.
“I smell the subtle stench of appeasement” – Margaret Thatcher
There are people saying that this reflects the 47/53 split in the vote.
I try to tell them that when the boat leaves. having 43% on one leg on the dock and 53% on the other on the boat is a Really Bad Idea.
If there is a general election, and if Corbyn gets 40% of the vote, the conservatives 39% of the vote, with the other 21% split between other parties, this would give the labour party a majority of over 60.
In these circumstances will Corbyn open up his first cabinet meeting saying the country is really split, 40% labour, 39% conservative and we need to bring the country together, and heal wounds and take notice of the split such that we should implement just 40% of the labour manifesto, and implement 39% of the conservative manifesto.
That is not how UK politics works. We had a referendum, which the government confirmed that the decision would be left to the electorate and it would implement the decision of the electorate in that referendum.
The vote was leave. Since the EU is an intangible conceptual object made up of its conventions, rules, regulations, laws, treaties, practices, codes, policies etc, it follows that to leave such an intangible object one must leave all its conventions, rules, regulations, laws, treaties, practices, codes and policies etc. There is only one form of leaving and that is what is now called a hard brexit. As a matter of definition, there is no other form of leave. I knew that brexit was lost as soon as the media started talking about hard brexit and soft brexit. In fact it was lost as soon as there was a stitch up regarding Cammeron’s successor.
All the government had to do was to implement a hard brexit. That was the instruction given to it by the voters, and what it promised that it would do. Of course, if some trade deal could be agreed which would not involve taking us back into the single market, the customs union etc, so much the better, but if not then there would be no deal on trade. Just leave the country to its own devices.
You cannot leave a train by leaving one foot in the carriage. It is just impossible.
I voted Leave, but even so I don’t like to exaggerate the result, which 47/53 does. It was 48.1% Remain, 51.9% Leave.
It infuriates me when people say Parliament won’t do this or that – M.P.’s should be forced to vote in line with their constituents’ votes on this issue! Which would certainly be more than 52% constituencies for Leave.
Rich.
You know, after years of seeing your comments, I think I finally figured out your screen name pun. I can be a little slow sometimes.
If vote after vote is held until eventually the politicians get the result THEY want, and then voting ceases, is this democracy?
I would say no.
No mention of the fact that the USA and the UK are among the few countries to actually reduce their CO2 and that the USA leads the way.
They do not need the Paris Agreement, they have already “done their bit”
The USA is about number 15 on the per-capita-CO2-emissions list. Australia is worse, Canada is worse still, and most of the other top countries are Middel Eastern. The USA’s reduction in emissions is also impressive, about 25% this century if I recall correctly, when the majority of countries are increasing theirs.
The USA is not my country, but I love truth when I find it.
As an English man I have found that the “establishment” have decided I do not exist.
The Irish, Welsh and Scottish all have designations on most government paraphernalia.
But I as Englishman, have to be British.
So it does not surprise me when a London biased watermelon establishment insult a world leader.
Watermelon, that would be sickly green on the outside while pinko-red on the inside.
Correct. First coined by James Delingpole to describe Climate Alarmists. He freely admitted to knowing nothing about climate science, but came out against them purely on the basis of their (lack of moral) behaviour.
His position was arrived at ‘because if they have to use holocaust denial the truth cant be good enough for their Cause ‘
Ergo they were lying. And the people who lie in politics are always the Left by and large.
Don’t believe Breitbart. There is little support for Trump in the UK. A pro-Trump rally would have gone the way of Trump’s inauguration: Poorly attended.
If it would have been so poorly attended it would not have needed to be banned.
See Susan’s remarks below. It was banned as potentially violent, and the ersatz-rally did indeed turn violent.
and who kicked that off I wonder.Same ‘anti fascist ‘ crowd
I really doubt Trump supporters would have been the violent ones, Richard.
No, it would have been those anti-science brainwashed tools the Climate Cabal uses to further their agenda, which is nefarious to the core.
I’ve been waiting for over 30 years to see some, nay, ANY evidence that the planet’s climate is about to destroy us and there’s NONE!
That should inform every thinking individual that the ploy by the UN to use Climate as a tool of control is bogus to the core. Suck enough people into a series of lies and the perpetrators of perfidy gain control.
President Trump’s brave and honest stance is starting the push back that will expose the UN for what they really are; Trump’s efforts to defund that bunch of thieves and hypocrites have them boxed into a corner from which they’ll never recover.
#Walkaway!
The most violent groups in Britain are hard left anti-fascists who project their own love of bully-boy tactics onto their opponents. Hate not Soap as we call them are among the worst.
Animal Liberation Front is another.
Leo Smith
No such thing as a far left anti-fascist.
It’s just fascist.
The reason the fascists and the communists hate each other so is because they are competing in the same market. In essence only the language differs.
Read Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning”.
I think of political opinion in the same way as a horseshoe. The very far left and far right are so close to each other but not quite touching. They have a different final position but many things are the same to achieve their goals.
Once again the left uses their own threats of violence as an excuse to shut down any demonstration they disagree with.
PS: Susan makes a statement with which you agree, so for you that constitutes irrefutable proof. Leftists are so predictable.
No. The rally took place, entirely peacefully. The police notices to the contrary were wrong.
It wasn’t banned. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trump-uk-visit-latest-protests-tommy-robinson-free-rally-police-restrictions-violence-disorder-a8444016.html
Since the supporters intended to also support “Free Tommy Robinson” – a known fascist thug – then it is pretty much guaranteed that it would have become a violent demonstration. It is normal to ban such events in any civilized country.
steveta
I might not like Robinson because of his methods, but he’s anything but a fascist. He publicly burned a swastika flag and was threatened by a prominent German neo Nazi for doing so.
HotScot, you don’t have to like Nazis to be a fascist. I have no idea if he is one, I’m just sayin’, is all.
Kristi Silber
Pointless comment.
“It is normal to ban such events in any civilized country.” Any ‘civilized country’ that doesn’t have freedom of speech!
The problem is, banning any speech or public assembly under the guise of safety is a convenient way to suppress anything the ruling government doesn’t want the public to hear or see. If the ruling government is corrupt, which it probably is, then there is no better way to prevent legitimate public complaints than to prohibit them for the public’s own welfare.
“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.” [variously attributed to Voltaire]
Clyde, it wasn’t a guise. In June there was a rally for Robinson in which 5 police officers were injured.
I don’t know anything about the circumstances of the injuries or who was responsible during the Robinson rally. However, what was being discussed was a rally supporting Trump, which was really separate from Robinson. I stand by my claim that “safety is a convenient way to suppress anything the ruling government doesn’t want the public to hear or see.” There are alternatives to an outright ban on assembly to lessen the risk of injuries, such as having the police better prepared.
It is unfortunate that you don’t appreciate the importance of freedom of speech and the right to assembly. But, then there seem to be many things that you see with blinders.
The Trump rally was planned to join the Robinson rally (which is interesting in itself). They were not separate.
There was no ban on either rally, and they happened.
“It is unfortunate that you don’t appreciate the importance of freedom of speech and the right to assembly.”
BS. Did I say the rally should have been banned? No. I merely said that the rationale behind setting limits set on the rallies was not a “guise,” since a Robinson rally just last month turned violent (Robinson reportedly incites violence).
Nice try. When your reasoning is dubious, just insult your opponent.
Seemingly they have no problem with sanctioning genocidal Hezbollah marches though. The fascist thug is in your mirror.
Typical of a troll to bad mouth Tommy Robinson who is neither a fascist nor a thug.
As usual, liars lie by omission and outright deceit, often mostly to themselves- that is where it originates. How about you grow up and attempt to understand context rather than narrative. You spew puerile garbage because you are a liar:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/
And I don’t care how anyone views my language; if I see a liar I expose a liar. Steveta is a liar
Tommy Robinson may be lots of things but fascist is not one of them. You know that fascists are ‘National Socialists’ don’t you?
It wasn’t banned. It happened, and it was poorly attended.
Don’t confuse them with facts ;(
What facts? She is making an ambiguous claim without a citation to allow independent verification.
Clyde, sorry, I wrote a post with citations and evidently forgot to post it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-london-welcome-trump-rally-20180714-story.html
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/pro-donald-trump-rally-
london/
“A “Welcome Trump” march merged with a protest in support of freeing jailed far-right leader Tommy Robinson in central London on Saturday afternoon.
Hundreds of protesters gathered in White Hall, the section of London that includes Parliament and most of the British federal government. Hundreds of signs that read “Britain Loves Trump” and “Free Tommy Robinson” could be seen among flags that double as nativist symbols—Union Jacks, the red and white English flag, and American flags.
https://wokesloth.com/pro-donald-trump-rally-london-ddt/distributor/
Here’s a whole hour and a half of it.
Are you saying that the Pro-Trump rally was held, or that a Robinson rally was held? Please write clearly, unless it is your intent to be vague.
With the sharp increase in knife and acid attacks, London’s politicians needs Trump to distract the population from their real problems.
Acid attacks are especially monstrous. These are an imported crime foreign to western cultures.
When we lived in Malaysia the sale of acid to the public was banned to try and eliminate the problem.
But of course in London I would be arrested for hate crimes for daring to suggest that acid attacks are an imported crime. London’s finest out pounding a beat on the internet. Leaving the streets to police themselves.
As devastating as they are cowardly, acid attacks are almost completely unknown in the west, where you can buy muriatic acid for about $1 a liter at any hardware store.
Probably a very occasional acid attack does happen in the U.S. The reason the amount of violence is down generally in the U.S. has to do with an increasing chance that the offender will be shot by the intended victim or a bystander. It is estimated that as many as 25 percent of young women concealed carry, for instance. When you get out of California, Chicago, and New York City your chance of staring down the barrel of a pistol or shotgun goes up drastically as you attempt a criminal action.
Here in AZ were I live I can go into a Bank a store we see people openly carrying. I feel perfectly safe as does my wife.
michael
Great and then you end up needing to ban the sale of any glass objects or pencil sharpeners. Almost anything can become a weapon. Look how ingenious prisoners get in order to make weapons.
To back this point up. People should watch a mythbusters episode where they made a crossbow out of paper. Interesting but a bit concerning
It has been my observation of Progressives that a common trait is the denial of reality and a fervent belief that simplistic answers are sufficient to bring about a Utopia. For example, banning common weapons overlooks the fact that the definition of a criminal is someone who does not observe the law and, thus, will not respect the ban. Even if society should be reasonably successful in making it difficult to legitimately purchase common weapons, substitutions can be made in the form of kitchen knives, and paper crossbows. The weapons of choice are largely dictated by the cultural history of the society. The weapons of second choice are dictated by ingenuity and available resources.
It is worst. You get in trouble just defending yourself
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/04/suspected-burglar-dies-tussle-pensioner-78/
michael
Well in the end Mr Osborn-Brooks was not charged with any offence or suffered any legal penalty and has suffered no burden other than having to carry the thanks of a grateful nation.
“It has been my observation of” most humans in the thrall of ideology, right left or otherwise, “that a common trait is the denial of reality”, and a tendency to accuse opposing groups only – not themselves – right left or otherwise, of denying reality.
Hey, jim hogg! That’s a darn good observation! You and I seem to have a shared – and apparently uncommon – perspective.
So it would appear Kristi. Rare voices in the wilderness.
To quote Ian McHarg in the movie Multiply and Subdue the Earth, 4 out of 5 Manhattanites have serious neuroses and 3 out of 5 have serious psychoses. So, I wouldn’t take comfort in the fact that someone agrees with your views. The question is whether the “Rare voices in the wilderness” merit listening to, or if they are the howlings of madmen.
I remember that viable kill shot straight out of the gate, then the rest of the day trying to do it again before the weapons collapsed…..
You can make a shiv (prison lingo for makeshift stabbing weapon) out of toilet paper. Wet the sheets, wrap them together, let dry, repeat. Eventually you have a piece of pseudo-wood that can hold a sharp point.
And you have around 30 potential razor blades in your mouth right now. Like obsidian stone, you can split the enamel of a tooth just right and get an extremely sharp edge.
The trouble is that strong bleach if thrown into the eyes is just as bad. It is difficult to see how bleach could be banned.
A weapon is ANYTHING that can cause harm and is used purposely by someone to injure another. That includes baseball bats, carpenter’s hammers, and the jawbone of an ass.
“That includes baseball bats, carpenter’s hammers, and the jawbone of an ass.”
There’s no need to bring Mann into this.
A thorny branch pulled from a tree. A garotte made from shoelaces, or from growing out and braiding your own hair. Claws from growing out your fingernails and filing them to points. Poison gas from mixing bleach and your own urine. And on and on…
“Acid attacks are especially monstrous. These are an imported crime foreign to western cultures.”
Really? why has it been a specific criminal offence under Section 29 of the Offences Against the Person Act since 1861?….
Because “culturally” they are/were for the most part unused and would have/are seen as beyond the norms. For example where I grew up fist fights while illegal but were not seen as a big deal. Using a weapon eye gouging etc were. In one HS your first fight of the year you got a warning. Most of the HS kids had their own guns given by parents. Never saw or heard of anyone bringing gun to school no less using it or a knife to settle a fight. They would have been shunned by all. The culture in other places like Tijuana not so much.
So his statement is accurate. An acid attack would have gotten you a longer sentence then shooting someone.
“Because “culturally” they are/were for the most part unused and would have/are seen as beyond the norms. ”
Well no… Acid attacks declined after *WW2 *mostly due to effective controls and policing. Otherwise they were a common form of assault from when the industrial revolution was well established.
https://legalhistorymiscellany.com/2017/09/13/acid-attacks-in-nineteenth-century-britain/
“There is little support for Trump in the UK”
You must tell us how you actually know. Otherwise, and as I suspect, it is merely ‘fake news’
The good Professor also fell for the fake news that DJT’s inauguration was poorly attended.
It wasn’t as well attended as it could have been. I think many people stayed away because of fear of left wing violence. I wouldn’t want to take my family to see the president, no matter how I support him if there is a decent chance the kids would get bashed by some progressive loons.
It wasn’t badly attended, but Trump did lie through his teeth for no good reason about it being bigger than Obama’s. There is a difference.
From the headlines alone, I can see how some people could get the impression. However, we shouldn’t expect foreigners to get into the nuances of our internal news.
Why? They expect us to know the rest of the world’s.
Best example of the bias I saw was BBC vs. Any American news outlet after first Quatamo detainees released. The detainees quoted as saying they were treated good. BBC headline “detainees say they were tortured”
Seriously!!
Polling summarized here https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-popular-britain-heres-what-polling-says-1016136
Hardly surprising Richard, given that the British public have been fed with a barrage of fake news and lies about Trump by the BBC and rest of the MSM.
But I’m still not sure what Trump’s popularity, good or bad, has to do with banning a protest
Snowflakes can’t withstand logical discussion. They’d rather riot and incite violence.
Worrall claimed that the pro-Trump rally would have been yuge. He provides no evidence for that claim, and there is evidence to the contrary: Trump is bigly unpopular in the UK.
Trump was yugely unpopular in the USA on November 8, 2016 per all the news sources. Way less popular than the incredibly lovable Hillary Clinton and yet somehow she lost. It shouldn’t of even been close.
Somehow I doubt the polls. They are done in a way to get the results news groups want, and people are intimidated into not wanting to support Trump. I keep quiet about my Trump support – I don’t want to get yelled at, at work. I had some progressive out and ask me if I voted for Trump at work – a year later, and I said yes (I didn’t bring it up, I am careful not to talk politics) but I answered yes, and then he started yelling at me. He was my boss too, what could I do. It is a real problem.
And Newsweek is under criminal investigation by the FBI. Not exactly the most reliable source.
Hillary didn’t just lose. She was stomped on a state by state basis.
Sue your boss for harassment – after all, you are in the USA, litigious home of the world.
Rich.
Next time you get asked a similar question by an apparent leftoid in authority, remember your pocket media studio and get the reaction on video.
“Trump was yugely unpopular in the USA on November 8, 2016 per all the news sources. Way less popular than the incredibly lovable Hillary Clinton and yet somehow she lost. It shouldn’t of even been close.”
well we don’t need a poll we can count the actual votes…
2016 Presidential Election
Candidate Party Popular Votes
Donald J. Trump Republican 62,980,160
Hillary R. Clinton Democratic 65,845,063
Gary Johnson Libertarian 4,488,931
Jill Stein Green 1,457,050
Nearly 3 million more for Hill the Shill… Now she failed to understand the difference between a Federal and a popular Republic and didn’t target her campaigning to yield Electoral College votes. It’s the best evidence that she shouldn’t be President. Stand for office, read the fricking rule book at the start….It’s not that big or complicated……
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/provisions.html
Your conclusions are not well thought out. First many whom might have voted for Trump did not because they knew the rules and therefore knew Trump had already won and voting in a place like California would not get him any electoral college votes. They may hav voted libertarian or not voted at all. Same could be said for some green votes who would have voted H if they thought it would matter. Also, one can assume Trump did not try to get more votes in strong dem states.
polls also showed electoral college being a win for H so I think the point still stands polls sucked why should they be believed now?
“Your conclusions are not well thought out.”
You don’t agree that a person too foolish or lazy to read the balloting rules and design their campaign accordingly would likely lack the talent to be a good president? Well OK I support freedom of thought.
All the points you make regarding Trunp voters are analogously applicable to a Hil voter.
“polls also showed electoral college being a win for H so I think the point still stands polls sucked why should they be believed now?”
These are the tabulated ballots not a poll.
oops
I wouldl say that the same people who support te EU are the useful idiots of the Left and the Greens and believe in the BBC would be against Donald.
And they are not in a majority.
Despite what opinion polls have been constructed to imply.
I have been a Conservative voter for 50 years, a climate skeptic from day one, an active (and occasionally successful) opponent of the modern enviro-activist and all his wiles and mendacity for longer than I care to remember.
I could name a dozen other people of my personal acquaintance and my age who would tick the same boxes.
We all believe that in present circumstances Britain is better in the EU than outside.
Stop pigeon-holing people according to your personal prejudices. Humans come in all shapes, sizes, ages, shades of belief, and intellectual capacity. (My IQ is 135, Leo, what’s yours?). We are not clones.
I believe that those in cities that get back some of the money the EU takes from us in the form of arts, research education and building projects are better off in the EU but the rest of us lose far more than these people gain.
This was reflected in the referendum by the apathy of the remain vote and their whining after the event as they gained little from the EU. Those who paid twice what the others gained with no return or worse the”benefit” of low grade unskilled workers taking scarce jobs were highy motivated to vote leave.
The case of Trump is very similar but from the opposite stance. The trendy left green lobby that has grown fat and greedy on eco subsidies is vociferous in its objections while the of the UK rest quietly admire him.
No he isn’t at all.
Richard S.J. Troll,
Where is the evidence for your claim?
No Worrall didn’t and no Trump isn’t.
Eric suggests in his header that it might have been ‘big’.
“Yuge”(sic)? Hardly.
Of course, the well funded denizens of lefty academia may not like Trump.
But don’t underestimate what ordinary British people, so used to picking up the dirty end of every stick, think about Trump.
yeah- here too- that’s why hillary won
oh, wait…
Maybe you’d like to do your Trumpophobia gig over at the Guardian?
It is telling that American NPR regularly features BBC news on its radio broadcasts.
It wasn’t banned. A cursory check would confirm that. Restrictions were imposed and reasons given. I posted a link above . .
So, someone saw fit to vote that comment down . . . presumably because they didn’t like it. I can see why: it contained a ref to facts that undermine one of the fantasies being promulagated on here. The pro Trump demo wasn’t banned. That’s a fact, and yet comment after comment plus the head post declares that it was. Mainly, I suspect, because the commenters and the OP prefer the fantasy, the conspiracy, to the boring reality. Btw, I’m a genuine AGW sceptic and I suspect that all the nonsense and irrationality in the comments on here, and in some of the head postings, undermine the credibility of the sceptic position and this site as a whole.
The link above is for a 5-day old article claiming that the rallies would be permitted. Little was said about the pro-Trump rally. However, it it NOT confirmation that the rallies took place, nor does it contradict the article quoted by Worrall. How do you expect to gain any credibility if you post links that don’t support what you appear to be claiming?
Omissions, Lies, Statistics, Models.
The polls told Cameron that a referendum would be a slam dunk. So he pushed for one to cement legitimization of a more pro EU stance.
The polls were wrong. And now the British people must be punished for defying the dictates of their betters in the EU Politburo.
Where’s your poll showing that Britain was going to vote to stay within the EU?
Nearly all of them did.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/eu-referendum
Until quite lose to the referendum when people started to smell a rat.
It was more the insider view than anything solid in the polls. The whole political establishment is by and for the cities so they were out of touch with the rest of the country.
I wouldn’t be calling attention to that demonstration….
Most communists look like the only work they have ever done is attend rally’s demanding more free stuff from the government.
Latitude
Does communism allow long haired, shirtless, pseudo intellectuals, covered in tattoos, waving banners against the establishment to attend demonstrations insulting visiting dignitaries?
I’m sure N. Korean’s and Cuban’s could advise on their tolerance.
Communists will allow anything to happen that they think furthers their agenda.
Communism loves freaks, until the communists secure power and start liquidating the useful idiot freaks.
Useful idiot. He has no idea, what would happen after the communists took power. The first order of business would be to eliminate their violent and vocal supporters. They would declared parasites on society and send to a rest camp to count trees. In the old CCCP it was east of the Urals.
michael
It’s the usual situation. The blue-pilled live in bogus BBC multi-kulti utopia land and the red-pilled support Trump. More and more people are taking the red pill as they watch their countries and cultures get systematically destroyed. Once you take the red pill there is no going back whereas the blue-pilled are at best quasi-stable.
And, may I add, don’t believe a professor of economics whose academic career has been built on ‘climate change’ being a threatening fact.
There is a minority in the UK which hates President Trump. There is a larger minority which thinks he’s doing a good job in standing up for Americans, and wishes we has a few British politicians who would stand up in like fashion for us.
JF
And a majority who don’t really know or care, but fancy Melania something rotten, and are mildly jealous
Au contraire. There is quite a considerable amount of support for Donald Trump. The simple fact is that the utter Muppet Sadiq Khan’t allowed anti-Trump demonstrations to go ahead and banned any and all pro-Trump demonstations.
Democracy? You’re ‘aving a laugh mate.
Currently we live in an elected dictatorship.
the mayor of London does not seem to make it into any of the news on the restrictions placed on certain demonstrations. are you adding a straw man to this argument?
As per a London Assembly member (the London Assembly is the council that rules London under the mayorship of Khan). Khan is the overseer of the police in the capital.
“I was planning to go to the American embassy to meet with a group of demonstrators who are planning to welcome Trump into the country… it’s really good to see him in this country, and speaking truth to the people in power in this country,” explained David Kurten, an elected member of the London Assembly for the Brexit-supporting UK Independence Party.
“But as I came out of the police station I was handed this piece of paper by a couple of friendly police officers — who were just doing their job — but they’ve imposed Section 12 Public Order Act conditions on the assembly outside the American embassy, which means that people are not allowed to proceed or have a march or any kind of demonstration,” he claimed.
“And we’ve also been told that if I go to the American embassy in a group of three or more people that I’m liable to be arrested myself — so free speech is dead,” he concluded.
https://truthfeednews.com/khan-was-just-busted-blocking-pro-trump-rally-and-his-reason-will-infuriate-you/
AND:
https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/07/14/police-khans-london-ban-pro-trump-rally-u-s-embassy/
Exactamundo. I wouldn’t go and rally to support trump, although I quite admire the old bastard, BUT banning a rally I WOULD go and protest.
Rubbish. The pro Trump rally wasn’t banned. See the ref above. Or just do a basic check online. Please, folks, check the facts.
Rubbish, there is a good deal of support for Trump in the UK, many people I know are disgusted at the way he has been treated. We just don’t need to go on a march to prove that we like him.
Richard S.J. Trol, aka Griff
Yep,S.J.= social justice and troll speaks for itself,just a windup merchant
Hi Cube
No, Griff was a decent human being, polite civil, I kind of miss him.
michael
Don’t believe everything you read in the MSM.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2018/07/13/a-hate-trump-poll-goes-horribly-wrong/
Most people in the U.K. have less than no interest in American politics.
Then why so many people at anti-Trump rallies?
Because the hard left is well organised, well funded and trained better than Pavlov’s dogs to leave the security of their mums basements and their council flats and jump up and scream Fascist! Racist! at anything that Hate not Soap tells them is part of the evil fascist forces that run the world and make them useless impoverished dullards on state support.
And besides where better to pick up a ‘sleeping’ partner of either sex, and have some drugs and unhygienic sex and bask in the afterglow of virtue signalling?
Nothing gets a leftist more upset than threatening his/her supply of free stuff.
I find it wonderfully fitting that the very actions they take protesting manifest the exact actions they claim the establishment forces upon them.
30 is the magic number for me; if you aren’t already producing something of value in society via gainful employment or self employment, and producing children, then there is little hope one will ever mature.
There is a sad, childish naivety in modern neo Marxist post modernist ideology. It’s akin to watching a bright child slowly destroy themselves with drugs and alcohol, all the while attempting to take down everyone that loves them with their sinking ship.
At some point I have to remember to allow some empathy part all the disgust and hatred I have for these nitwits, otherwise it would lead to acting just like them.
Susan,
That is probably as it should be. One needs to get their own house in order before criticizing others.
Hello Susan
So are you saying that the Trump bashers are not part of “most of the people in the UK”
and the the climate policies his administration holds don’t matter to “most of the people in the UK” after all. Thank you for clarifying that you and Richard S.J. Tol are so out of touch main stream UK concerns.
Honesty is such a good and noble thing, its is such brave stance to admit that you and the others of your philosophy are in reality the “Mensheviks”
michael
Most people in the U.K. don’t know much about their own politics and politicians as is shown by low voting turnout. It is improbable that they have any real interest in foreign politicians. If they read the Sun they may well be vaguely pro-Trump but not enough to join demonstrations.
Liar……………
Pure conjecture!
That is utter nonsense, outside the Guardian when one looks at the comment sections in newspapers, there is overwhelming support for President Trump.
As for President Trump’s inauguration one has to bear in mind that he was anti DC, so it is little surprise that locals in DC did not show up in great numbers, and President Trump’s supporters reside far away from DC and are hard working ordinary citizens such that it is difficult to take time off work, and incur the expense involved in attending the inauguration.
Nothing should be read into that regarding his support. The fact is that President Trump could fill stadiums whereas Clinton could not. That is the real test.
Rubbish.
“There is little support for Trump in the UK”…
You do realize the population of the UK is way over 60 million..
…and only 10’s of thousands demonstrated
…that’s around 0.02%
Like there was little support for Brexit
Richard S.J. Troll:
You can’t believe the main stream American media anymore and
from the look of it you can’t spell properly either !
Perhaps it’s MY eyesight that’s failing !??
Trump’s inauguration was so poorly attended that he won the office of president.
His supporters have jobs, so weren’t able to turn out as did the jobless Antifa backers of Obama.
So if it would have been poorly attended then it should have been allowed as it would have been no problem at all to police. The fact is that outside London and possibly a few other high immigrant level cities, which are as different to the rest of the UK as any leech is to its host, Trump as leader of an allied country would have been welcomed by those whether they support his views or not as a straight matter of courtesy.
Trumps opponents are the same sort who opposed honouring the referendum result. Arrogant selfish and in the main, sorry to have to say, this like to admit it or not ignorant as sh!t narrow minded arty and trendy leftie political types.
As an Englishwoman I would say that quite a lot of the more vocal people highly disapprove of Trump for a wide variety of reasons, many of them quite reasonable. The vast majority of the population have no opinion one way or the other and were more interested in the tennis and the football. The ‘pro-Trump’ demonstrators were the ‘Free Tommy Robinson’ mob as far as I am aware.
I disapprove of disrespect shown to a foreign had of state who is a guest of the Queen. She’s had to take tea with worse than Trump.
As an Englishman I can assure you that most ordinary Brits back Trump as a breath of fresh air.As for the pro Trumpers going to join the TM ‘mob’ they wanted to demonstrate solidarity for free speech.Don’t believe everything you read or watch in the media
Susan
I’m not sure that acting in the sole interest’s of his country is a reasonable basis for criticism of Trump. That’s his job after all.
If he thinks surrendering trillions of dollars to the Chinese and other rent seeking signatories of the Paris Accord is a bad idea when the US is reducing it’s emission with no influence from anyone else, then it’s a bad idea for America.
If he thinks uncontrolled immigration is bad for the US then, similarly, it’s a bad idea.
If he believes trade tariffs are good for America, then he should, and is, using them.
If he demands equitable NATO contributions from participating countries, that’s entirely reasonable. Clearly, he’s not interested in America being the worlds Policeman, a criticism long levelled at the country. His position on this issue alone should have the left thanking him instead of finding another means of criticising him.
As far as a I can gather, the only criticisms the left have of the man is that he’s wealthy, successful, with a devoted family, few, if any vices, and an unfortunate hair style. Oh! it seems he likes McDonalds.
But of course he also supports Israel, which doesn’t sit comfortably with the anti-semitic left.
No vices?? A highly objectionable attitude to women (on record), dodgy business tactics (allegedly) and an unfortunate twitter addiction (also on record). I don’t give a damn about USA politics but I would cross the road to avoid that guy.
“Unfortunate twitter addiction..” Oh, my. Can’t have him talking directly to the American people, can we?
Susan
“A highly objectionable attitude to women (on record)”
A single statement, made in jest according to him. Accusations against him by various women have not been proven and smack of bandwagon jumping.
Meanwhile, he has a wife and family, nor does he drink or smoke. And I might just mention Monica Lewinsky. Or perhaps that Bush the younger is a reformed alcoholic.
“dodgy business tactics (allegedly)”
Yes “allegedly”. The guy’s 70+ years old, has been in business all his life and to my knowledge, hasn’t been convicted of anything, despite the continual smear.
“and an unfortunate twitter addiction (also on record)”
Which was probably instrumental in winning the election as he was communicating with people directly. And you don’t believe his tweets are random do you? He has an army of advisor’s to call on to plan his next tweet. The guy may be unorthodox, but he sure isn’t daft.
Don’t forget that Obama admitted to using plenty of illegal drugs in high school (from his composite ‘autobiography’).
He also admitted to doing the same while attending Harvard while skipping classes.
“Susan: “A highly objectionable attitude to women (on record)”
HotScot: “A single statement, made in jest according to him. Accusations against him by various women have not been proven and smack of bandwagon jumping.
Meanwhile, he has a wife and family, nor does he drink or smoke. And I might just mention Monica Lewinsky. Or perhaps that Bush the younger is a reformed alcoholic.”
Or that Bush the younger likes to hang out with the rapist, Bill Clinton. The whole Bush family seems to like keeping company with this abuser of women.
I wonder what they talk about around the dining room table.
Tom Abbott
“I wonder what they talk about around the dining room table.”
Bush senior probably keeps them entertains with stories of his involvement in Kennedy’s assassination.
What a shame he comes over as completely loopy then.
Susan
Why, because he says what needs to be said instead of skirting round the issues like all other politicians?
The man has built a business empire, consorted with heads of state, employs thousands of people, built innumerable structures, yet you deem him loopy?
He couldn’t have done any of that without being credible. Ruthless in business perhaps, but go to ‘glass door’ and look up the comments from employees about him, especially female employees. The majority of the people who work for him really like him. It seems he gives everyone a fair chance irrespective of race, religion or gender. If you don’t make it, you’re out, irrespective of race, religion or gender.
If you imagine I like him because some media outlet convinced me to, you’re very much mistaken. I hated the thought of him becoming POTUS almost as much as I hated the thought of Clinton.
But from day one he started doing what I have never seen a western leader do in my lifetime, begin to tick off his manifesto promises, one by one. So I stared doing some research on the guy and realised he is what I had been calling for myself for the last 40 years, a businessman prepared to run the huge business that is the USA.
Every country is a profitable enterprise. We are all employees of our country, and Trump is saying he’s going to ensure USA employees enjoy better wages, better conditions, better healthcare and better living standards because of one single prerogative; work hard, make profit and enjoy the dividends.
Should hard working Americans pay for free-loading immigrants? Perhaps, on a humanitarian level, but not until American families have enough income to enjoy the sense of helping others because they can afford to, not because they’re compelled to.
Get the profit bit sorted out, and the rest follows. And it’s contagious.
“Why, because he says what needs to be said instead of skirting round the issues like all other politicians?”
No, because he goes tit-for-tat on every little insignificant thing. It makes him petty and petulant. I agree with his policies, don’t agree with his personality.
Jeff Alberts
“No, because he goes tit-for-tat on every little insignificant thing.”
Perhaps that’s what needs to be done. It seems to be getting results.
Perhaps the concept is, take care of the pennies and the pounds will take care of themselves.
When he’s constantly winning skirmishes, people (politicians) are less confident of winning the big battles.
And isn’t that the “broken window’ policy on US policing? Don’t let the little things get away from you, and then there’s less chance of the ‘big things’ getting out of hand?
Russ Wood
Truth in it, but discretion is always the watch word. Zero tolerance in policing undermines the human aspect of the job.
Policing was developed as a preventative measure, not the punitive function it’s now portrayed as.
Would we really punish a kid for kicking a football (soccer ball in the US) through a neighbours greenhouse? No one in their right mind would. Unless it was malicious.
I wont go into it, but for all practical purposes, the ‘broken window’ policy was a political ploy.
HotScot, I just wanted to let you know I truly admire the clarity of your statements. I seldom post because I’m often reading the posts a week or two after Anthony publishes his articles, but I truly enjoy the concise and crystal clear way in which you express your opinions. I know you are a humble man, but through your many posts I see a person worthy of much admiration. Your well thought-out and articulated posts really enhance my enjoyment of this blog. Please don’t stop, and thank you.
Jack Roth
I’m flabbergasted and not sure what to say other than thank you.
I only say what I think and stand by it until proven wrong, at which point I’ll back down, hopefully graciously, although rarely without a fight.
But please don’t read my discourse with Chris and Kristi, I fear your opinion of me may be tarnished. I’m not afraid to trade insults as the MOD will confirm.
“highly objectionable attitude to women”
Trump’s attitude towards women is far better than that of former presidents Clinton and Kennedy, and plenty of other members of their party (leftists).
I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s better that most. In my (i.e., our) generation it’s probably more common than most would like to admit… except maybe in the locker room. He just got caught by an open mic. Locally, most of the women I know just laughed about it when it came out.
disregard
Caught by an open mic? Hardly.
Whilst I do not seek to defend President Trump on this issue, and consider that many men do not treat women with the respect that they deserve, it is noteworthy that he did not say what has been reported. In particular, he never said that he “grabs women by the p*ssy” or “touches women by the p*ssy.” or similar. That is fake news, and it is always a good idea to go back to the actual data, and look at that, rather than to rely upon what has been reported.
The recording is on the internet, and you can hear what he says. He starts off in the first person talking about himself, and emphasises that he just kisses the girls, but then talks not about himself but switches to the third person, and talks generically about celebrities. What he says about celebrities is probably true.
In fact it is even more informative to look at the video, since his actions are very different and it appears that the reporters seek to set him up, but he has none of it.
“That is fake news, and it is always a good idea to go back to the actual data, and look at that, rather than to rely upon what has been reported.”
With regard to Trump, one should *never* accept the interpretation of what Trump says from anyone on the radical Left. They invariably misinterpret and distort what Trump says because they are always looking to portray Trump in the worst light possible.
If you want to know what Trump really says, then you need to listen to *his* words, not the words of his enemies.
Trump may share a vice with other presidents of the past. The difference is that the MSM looked the other way when presidents had mistresses. Today, the MSM is looking for any and all ways to criticize Trump, even when his behavior is not much different from MSM executives and anchors, or Hollywood moguls. It is the hypocrisy of the Left to expect “Don’t do as I do, but do as I say.” This is also shown by the Hollywood critics of American gun ownership while they become rich being role models of firearm violence.
You claim, “… I don’t give a damn about USA politics…”. but here you are commenting on USA politics. You are just as hypocritical as the MSM and Hollywood ‘elites.’
Yes Susan, the people who disapprove of Trump are more vocal, or to put it another way they shout a lot and stamp their feet about things they read on social media without actually concerning themselves about whether what they read is accurate. I would however doubt you claim that the vast majority has no opinion, in the same way as I doubt the claims of any of the protesters to speak on behalf of any group of people.
Reminds me of the magazine editor who couldn’t understand how Nixon won, when nobody she knew supported him.
I suspect that the vast majority of those that voted to leave the EU, are supporters of President Trump, and that is more than half the country.
I suspect that some of the people who voted remain also support President Trump since nearly everyone, no matter their background or party affiliations, thinks that there is a chasm between the elite/those that govern us, and the ordinary electorate such that the vast majority of people have utter contempt for politicians, and they despise political correctness.
President Trump is a breath of fresh air simply because he is not a politician, he is not politically correct and will call a spade a spade, and because he is keeping his pre-election manifest. That is a heady combination.
Robert Mugabe…?
And of course, Gordon “she was just a sort of bigoted woman. She said she used be Labour. I mean it’s just ridiculous.” Brown…
“…people highly disapprove of Trump for a wide variety of reasons, many of them quite reasonable. ”
“Reasonable” for people who can’t vote in the US, and don’t have to pay US taxes, or suffer the consequences of any mistakes Trump might make? That sounds more like the response of the neighborhood gossip sticking her nose into other people’s business.
If you want to alienate reasonable people in continental Europe from climate skepticism, rooting for Brexit may be the best way to do it.
Yes heaven forbid you lose a cash cow,one of the very few that pays in more than it gets out so you have to pay more yourselves.
You know those trolls who haunt any sensible website which opposes the SJW view of the world or debunks Climate Change catastrophe stories? The only way I’d care to be like them would be to have lots of email accounts so I could post under different names.
Then I’d give your post more than one uptick.
JF
Not really, if the block is able to cut its’ excessive spending on agriculture etc. That remains to be seen. But it is very nice for Britain to soon have 350 million (minus rebate) extra pounds to spend on the NHS. We all expect the Brits to be the healthiest people in Europe after Brexit;-)
Matti Virtanen
No one ever said the £350M would be spent on the NHS.
And HMG has already made binding commitments to EU spending which will leave us as net contributors for a good while yet…. there won’t be a penny of that 350M for the NHS for years….
We could abrogate those agreements but best of British luck signing new trade deals when your first act as in independent player is to violate your treaty obligations.
Nothing is settled until its all settled.
If the EU refuse whatever deal can be got through parliament and the British people then by default we are out with no deal and no £billions for the EU
Britain has a very strong hand. The EU just has a pair of jokers.
They are hoping we fold rather than call their bluff.
We held a fantastic hand, and once President Trump got elected, not only did we hold the aces, we also held the jokers (no disrespect intended to President Trump).
No other country within the EU holds our position.
1. English is the world language.
2 English is the language of trade.
3 English law and jurisdiction is the preferred choice of law and venue for trade, financial and mercantile disputes.
4. the major exchanges are based in London, eg the metal exchange, the Baltic, the grain and animal feed associations (GAFTA), federation of oils, feeds and fats associations (FOSFA), Lloyds etc.
5. London is the financial capital, being conveniently placed in the time zone between the US and the Far East.
6. Our former commonwealth where he have affiliations and relationships across the globe, including into China with Hong Kong and Shanghai.
7. We are the EU largest trading partner. The EU sells more into the UK than any other country. We ourselves sell relatively little into the EU, and the amount that we sell into the EU is falling year by year such that the importance of the EU market place is dwindling.
8. There is a huge balance of trade deficit with Germany such that we are an extremely important trading partner from Germany’s perspective, and if we do not take German goods, there is no other country within the EU that would take up the slack, not least because most EU countries are bust. We could validly demand that Germany pays us to access our market place.
9. The US runs a huge balance of trade deficit with Germany (about US$250 billion) such that the UK and the US have a common interest in dealing with this deficit such that Germany would be very exposed to joint action by the UK and the US.
10. that the UK is one of the few countries that meets its NATO obligations, and materially Germany falls well short such that the US and the UK have common interests in exerting pressure on Germany, in particular, but also on other EU member states.
11. The EU is in turmoil going in a direction that most citizens do not like. We could divide and conquer.
Only an incompetent government could throw away a hand like this. It also shows a complete lack of vision.
Of course, the reason why the government has made such a pigs ear of matters is that it does not want to leave and is all for one world government pursuant to directions from the unelected unaccountable globalist elite.
Spot on, Richard!
You know somthing sunshine, I don’t give a damn what anybody in continental Europe thinks about Brexit, and frankly its got absolutely nothing to do with you miserable shower anyway. It’s a decision the British People took and if you don’t like that then that’s just tough. Get over it.
I’ve well gotten over it. I was referring to reasonable people on the continent.
Well a lot of the ‘reasonable people’ are now voting for more freedom from the totalitarian EU
Oh I am sure he will tell you that’s simply fake news.
🙂
That’s always the it is with the left.
Reasonable people are those who agree with me.
Do you know what? It is sad beyond everything to see this. There is much to fix in the EU, and there is nothing wrong in the UK, and it has a full right to get rid of the EU. There is no democracy in a union which tries to keep it unified with force. And I can see that is happening; some EU politicians in power are willing to attack the UK with word and money, to force it to revert the decision.
Just remember. It is not me, a continental European, trying to stop the UK. It is the European Union, which is working by its own rules. And to wit, I never had much chance to choose what kind of Union my country joined. It was decided for me, by people like Angela Merkel. Leaders of France, Germany and the UK. We others more like just signed the paper offered. Take it, or leave it mentality.
We know. The EU has declared war on Britain…Fortunately Nato has the tanks or we would be like Poland, or Hungary, Or Czechoslovakia…
Its up to us to save Europe from its leaders and Germany, again….sigh..
That is what I thought the vote was partly about.
I thought that it might involve some short term pain, but it was our generation’s moment to do what our fathers had done, and to make a stand, to free Europe from itself, and from the domination of Germany.
“Fortunately Nato has the tanks”
Well one source of trans-Atlantic tension is that NATO doesn’t have the tanks….
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201802151061685708-germany-army-lacks-tanks/
Oh, it has everything to do with them. 350million+ reasons to be important to the EU and its hangers on.
Without Britain the EU is a total joke. Just a self legalising Mafia running a protection racket which people will realise they don’t actually need, and certainly do not want.
The EU isn’t dead, but its beginning to smell that way.
A fish rots….
The EU Presidents’ * New Clothes…
*Yes, they have about five of them I think.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_institutions_of_the_European_Union
More heads than the Hydra
Matti, from the tenor of your comment I suspect that your definition of ‘reasonable people’ is a tautology. ‘Scepticism’ is the necessary condition of the scientific mind.
BTW Good luck with finding enough ‘reasonable people’ to agree that fiscal transfers are an existential requirement for the continuance of the EU.
You don’t have to be reasonable. You just have to face facts.
The EU will die from economic incompetence.
High welfare spending, mass immigration which will inflict huge economic (as well as social) cost, and ever growing unaffordable energy prices which is rendering EU business and manufacturing uncompetitive on the world stage.
It is in a death spiral, which will become ever clearer as the sun rises in the East and as President Trump makes America great again.
” ‘Scepticism’ is the necessary condition of the scientific mind.”
Nonsense. Confirming what you already know is norm.
PLEASE don’t make me add a sarc tag.
Matti has a point.
People who are some form of non-alarmists (put it ‘climate skeptic’ if you want), might not always be Trump supporters, Brexit supporters, or hard EU skeptics, or Breitbart readers.
I kind-of like Trump, and feel symphathy on brexiters, but in the end, I want an EU that is strong enough not to be enslaved to Russian gas.
I wanted the EU to support Trump, and I wish the UK and the EU will remain strong together, and not start what they have started now that the people of the UK had had enough of directives from Brussels.
The EU appears more and more a beast loose that will attack anyone opposing it from inside. That is dangerous for a democracy. It is also dangerous for Europe, because it consists of small nations speaking scores of languages. There can not be an European Union without democratic foundations. The current system doesn’t work.
However, the EU is much better than the Soviet Union, and if by supporting the EU I can avoid the Russian Federation, I will always vote for the EU.
Your position is predicated on the faux assumption that a strong EU = a strong Europe and that the EU has any intention of standing up to Putin
Britain is not leaving NATO.
The EU is the reincarnation of the Soviet Union, a point made by the former Soviet leader, President Gorbachev:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/565258-the-most-puzzling-development-in-politics-during-the-last-decade
In other words, the best way to convince people that climate change is a fraud, is by enslaving a group of people.
If they were truly “reasonable people” they would realize that there is no rational connection between climate change skepticism and one’s opinion on the merits of Brexit. The two are connected only by political dogma.
“Scientists are warning ever more urgently that we need to act”
Because if we don’t their predictions could be proved wrong and they will look like gooses.
More importantly the grant money will dry up.
Because if we don’t the imminent cooling can’t be claimed by them as a result of windmills and solar panels
Trump is a disaster. The US leads the world in CO2 climate pollution and… What? It doesn’t?? Never mind…
In the end “Tommy Robinson” is a nasty little racist, and his followers generally not the sharpest knives in the drawer. If they were they’d realise that breaching reporting restrictions in a criminal trial :
a) Might have resulted in a guilty criminal being released back to society.
b) Undermines “English” rights as they are normally understood to be.
He’s not a political prisoner, he committed a serious offence to which he plead guilty. And he went to jail because he’s a repeat offender.
I’d have to say it’s also very un-English to be holding an organised “Welcome” demo for any visiting HoS we normally don’t give a tinkers cuss about visiting foreign politicoes…
Yep,such a racist he has black and Sikh friends.It was Sikh girls getting groomed that got him started.He is also a journalist for the Muslin run Quilliam foundation against extremism.
He was also arrested and jailed within hours before his lawyer could get there,and given an undue heavy sentence.
Wouldn’t it have been great if those hundreds if not thousands of victims of grooming gangs were served with justice as quickly as the judiciary dealt with Mr Robinson, or whatever his name is? If the guy is what you say he is then locking him up is a bad idea; you counter with arguments and if you can’t perhaps your perception is wrong. Now he has ample time to write his own history. Perhaps he names it ‘My Struggle’ and creates a huge following on his release.
Show’s how little you know doesn’t it. Been listening to fake news again have we?
Firstly Robinson tried desperately hard to remove far right elements from the EDL he also has family members that are not whitel
Secondly the trial he was reporting on was already finished so he couldn’t possible have altered the outcome. He was denied his own lawyer, and the authorities told his lawyer separately that his services were not required. The solicitor he was given had no knowledge of contempt of court law, and advised Robinson to plead quilty as we would get off. Moreover the charge for which he was arrested was dropped.
His real crime is reporting about Muslim rape gangs that operate with the knowledge of the local authorities and local Police – a fact the establishment want to shut up.
You don’t know what the hell you’re wittering on about.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/05/25/what-has-happened-to-poor-tommy-robinson/
The ‘knuckle-dragging cheerleaders’ jibe shows the mask slipping a little perhaps.
Some expensive top-flight QCs disagree with the sentence at least. Let’s see what Sir Brian Leveson says tomorrow with luck. There has already been an eight-day delay in the appeal because the government side was not ready which suggests that things are not quite as clear-cut as the smarty boots secret barrister thinks.
”
The ‘knuckle-dragging cheerleaders’ jibe shows the mask slipping a little perhaps.”
The blog is written in a sardonic style, but still the truth is the truth…
“Some expensive top-flight QCs disagree with the sentence at least. ”
Some expensive top flight QC’s have been paid to argue for a reduction in sentence for the offences to which he plead guilty. Lets try for accuracy.
“There has already been an eight-day delay in the appeal because the government side was not ready which suggests that things are not quite as clear-cut as the smarty boots secret barrister thinks.”
One side not ready is unfortunately an everyday event in the English court system both criminal and civil…
Another lawyers take on his chances is here:
http://barristerblogger.com/2018/07/04/tommy-robinsons-appeal-will-his-world-class-legal-team-get-him-out-of-prison/
My knuckles are fine thanks. Engineering MA from Isaac Newton’s alma mater too which is mainly why this site interests me. The appeal is now being heard by a panel of three judges; Sir Ian Burnett, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Mr Justice Turner and Mrs Justice McGowan DBE. Kick off at 10:30 tomorrow in Court 4. The many comments by Mr B J Mann (and others) pointing out the errors in the blog post you linked to made more sense to me.
A very encouraging day at the Royal Courts of Justice yesterday, 18th July, where justice was seen to be done for probably the first time in this sorry saga. Jeremy Dein QC took us through the principal points of the appeal against both convictions and sentences and outlined the multiple failures of justice and procedure at both Canterbury and Leeds. It’s a pity the secret barrister wasn’t presiding at both those courts, perhaps there would have been fewer cock-ups. Ezra Levant’s twitter gives an excellent account knocking the socks off the feeble outpourings of ‘the reptiles’ (Private Eye). Just to prove that God has a sense of humour Cliff Richard won his case against the BBC on the same day setting off multiple fits of the vapours amongst ‘the reptiles’ hoist on their own petards (petard from French péter to fart).
Mz secretbarrister noticeably less cocky in her latest post. Nursing sore knuckles perhaps.
Duplicate removed….
Mike Ozanne
A small observation. Shouldn’t that be ‘drawer’?
I agree with you about Robinson. Odious character.
I would also say that if it’s un-English to hold a welcome rally for Trump, it might not be un-Scottish, Welsh, or N. Irish. And if it’s un-British, then an insulting demonstration against a HoS is also un-British.
Well quite…. Poor old Aunt Betty has had to meet a fair range of dodgy chancers over the years, Ceaușescu, Mugabe, Jiang Zemin, Putin… Most of us know she only does it through duty and fail to get excited about it.
Hot Scot; Can you tell me what is odious about this address to Oxford Union (Published 16 March 2015)?
There is a lot of odiousness in that video, but it is not what Robinson says or does.
Nigel Sherratt
Right message, wrong methods.
He’s certainly a rough diamond but a lion-hearted one and that deserves respect. I agree with the assessments of Douglas Murray and James Delingpole. This is the interview that got Brittany Pettibone banned from UK and imprisoned for three days without charge (to no avail in the internet age of course!). TR outlines his treatment at the hands of the state. Uncomfortable listening for naive supporters of the status quo like me. Full disclosure; I do not support the views of the Identitarians and believe that anyone that wants to come here to work, contribute and obey the law is welcome. I also believe in giving “the Devil benefit of law for my own safety’s sake” to quote Thomas More in ‘A Man For All Seasons’.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ngb65Gbxk9o/
Nigel Sherrat
I so much want to trust Robinson. He expresses many of my concerns in an articulate way, but I just can’t.
Somehow, I see a manipulative man, amongst all the horror stories he factually conveys, I see before me a McGuinness or a Choudry.
I have been with, and witnessed too many people with his powers of persuasion, who do it for their own benefit.
What endeared me to him more than anything else was his explanation about his teeth, a detail I noticed between earlier interviews and later ones. I wondered if he had them done for cosmetic reasons, but it seems they were a victim of a kicking.
But he explained he was the victim of several Muslims that attacked him (Muslims, not Islamist’s) and my first thought was, that if I had a minute alone with a guy, who I blamed for locking me away for life, if I could knock his teeth out, I could just as easily kill him. But they didn’t. That’s just not credible considering his claims he was always under threat of murder.
He presents himself when being arrested as the victim. I have arrested more people than I care to remember who always screamed Police brutality and injustice, no matter how guilty they were. Robinson conforms to that profile perfectly.
Of course, all his stories just conveniently line up. That’s not credible either. No one with a past as chequered as his has a convenient alibi or circumstance that works 100%, 100% of the time.
His Police and political conspiracy theories? Well, personally I have never seen any evidence, or heard any claims of something like this. Having said that, I have been out of the job for 30 years.
Very much a one sided story. Robinson was ‘interrogated’ by a sympathetic journalist who challenged nothing he said. Not that she could of course, because his rhetoric is all developed round his anecdotal experiences, which no one can question.
Sorry, not convincing. My position on him hasn’t changed. Like I said, right message, wrong method….or something like that.
Nigel Sherratt
Did you watch the video associated with the one you posted?
“Why the UK jailed Tommy Robinson”
No, there’s an appeal against the sentence on 18th, let’s see what the outcome is.
Nigel Sherratt
An appeal will only shorten his sentence. He admitted the crime, and now the case he interfered with is over, there’s little point in keeping him locked up.
I get what the guys saying, and I agree with a lot of it, other than the emotional and personal spin he introduces. According to him, there’s not an abused child, a raped girl or an assaulted guy he either doesn’t know, went to school with, or didn’t lived round the corner from.
What I despise are his methods.
In the same way, I can understand what Sinn Féin were saying during the troubles, but as credible as Gerry Adams was, we all knew he was into the violence up to his elbows. He knew precisely what was going on.
The case isn’t over, the third installment is due in September. 29 defendants in all. I never found Adams credible. Perhaps his attempt to blow up my daughter and a friend on their way to school along Archway Road on 4/10/1993 played a part in that. I was also in London on 7/7/2005 (body parts splattered on the walls on BMA as I walked to do a safety check for an AA exhibition and 21/7 when our office was evacuated after a failed bus bombing on Hackney Road.
Nigel Sheratt
You obviously knew more about Adams than the rest of the UK considering your daughters experience. His arguments broadcast in the UK at the time seemed convincing, but he came across as a manipulating bastard to me, but not to others. I had colleagues in NI and knew a few Army guys who were stationed there. They were all well aware of the guys influence.
I was a Cop in Glasgow in the 70’s, 80’s and was horrified when I was given the job of shadowing him (I wasn’t the only one) during a march through Glasgow. I was horrified the march took place never mind that I was ordered to keep an eye on him. But I did watch him quietly control every step of the march, whispering orders to runners who scurried off to deliver them to various part of the procession, and, of course, McGuinness. I didn’t see McGuinness, but colleagues assured me he was there although officially, he wasn’t supposed to be. I think he was persona non grata in the UK at the time.
Adams had complete and utter control over proceedings as far as I could see, and I’m convinced the only reason there wasn’t trouble was because most of the marchers were terrified of him, and of course, he had to maintain his public, political ‘impartiality’ roll.
It was when I was relieved to go for some lunch I realised the influence the man projected. On my way back to the canteen, I noticed the marchers were more and more animated the further I got from him. The return journey was almost depressing as I gradually walked into a wall of silence, with him in it’s midst.
My experience pales in comparison to yours though. I’m sorry you had to endure what you did.
“it might not be un-Scottish,”
As the Big ‘Yin explained after the Glasgow Airport jobbie… “Bigots coming to Glasgow and no bringing their own Fitba team…. F****** amateurs…..”
The pro- Trump rallies were correctly handled by Thinkpol.
Heed the prole feed’s two minute hate.
Tommy Robinson is an unperson. Brexit is oldthink.
Trump is doubleplusungood.
What’s the racism charge based on? If it’s his reporting on Muslims, they’re not a race, so impossible to be racist.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/
Odious because he head butts a guy who threatened his life? Oh, that’s right hot, I guess because he doesn’t have a magically ordained badge he isn’t permitted to initiate violence. Hypocrite.
Actually read up on the guy, this is what real citizens do to take action when your beloved fraternity doesn’t have the balls to root out Muslim violence.
“A few years ago, actions like the suppression of a peaceful welcome march in support of the President of a close ally would have been unthinkable. Today British government suppression of free speech and freedom of assembly is almost unremarkable, against the growing list of outrageous political attacks against what Britons used to think were their freedoms.”
Yes.
Something will have to give sooner or later.
Sorry for the politics. I live in the UK but you may have guessed that I am a Dutch national. I am adversely affected by the referendum result, but had no say in the matter at all. And rightly so. Yet I don’t think a new referendum would be a good idea, eventhough the earlier result was undoubtedly infuenced by quite a bit of false information, aka downright lies. Nevertheless a rerun would only compound the current mess. I also don’t think that the government is conspiring to reverse its result for the simple reason that there is no need for a conspiracy when incompetence suffices.
However, there are two facts I’d like to put to your attention concerning two strident brexiteers: a certain Rees-Mogg whom most of you will have never heard of and a certain Farage of whom you probably have. Mr. Farage has taken care that his children have obtained German passports. Mr Mogg has transfered the investment company he owns to Dublin in the Irish Republic. In both cases to safeguard access to the advantages of being part of the EU.
How’s that for bigotry, how’s that for a swamp?
No real issues there:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/974252/brexit-news-jacob-rees-mogg-investment-fund-dublin-ireland-somerset-capital-management
and Farage’s wife is German so why should the children not have additional passports?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/farage-yes-my-children-have-german-passports-2r0hb6xcc
How convenient.
So you think he married his German wife just to get a passport for their kids ?? How is that “bigotry” ? “You keep using that word..I don’t think you know the meaning” ..
Two of Nigel Farage’s children have a German mother. Why shouldn’t they have dual nationality?
Because it’s Farage… duh! Any stick will do to beat him because he’s so… so… right about things.
JF
The defining characteristic of tribalism is an inability to see the shortcomings in the own group.
Pot kettle black there dear.
Oh dear!
A German wife is not a shortcoming, unless you think like a racist.
Mrs Kirsten Farage is German. Mr Farage is crystal clear that he stands for the nation state against the globalists. Their children have a right to German nationality. They apply for the paper credentials of their lawful entitlement. What’s wrong with this ? (Ans: nothing at all.)
Colleagues of mine have a son born in the USA. He has both US and UK passports, quite lawfully, in both countries. What’s wrong with this ? (Ans: nothing at all).
Mr Rees-Mogg is well-known to have made his fortune in the City of London. He is entitled to move his paper headquarters wherever is prudent for the business. What’s wrong with this? (Ans: nothing at all). Before you cry “hypocrisy”, in case you hadn’t noticed, Brexit hasn’t actually happened. Rees-Mogg, of all people, is well-aware that it may not happen at all. In case you hadn’t noticed, a second fact: what we are currently offered is infinitely worse than outright “remain” EU membership, subjection without representation. Rees-Mogg is a parliamentarian, and not omnipotent. I can hope he may rock May’s boat hard enough that it sinks, but there are 600-odd other MP’s to second-guess. Mogg is entitled to hedge his business and livelihood.
You are funny. The implication of your take on Mogg’s action is that he, Mogg, is not so sure about the prowess of the UK enterprise as he claims to be. Why else hedge your bets?
Mogg has confidence in Brexit. But Brexit is no longer in prospect. The only thing on offer is something far worse than no Brexit at all, which anyone (except the Robot May) can see will plunge us into chaos. No one could, or should, have any confidence in this. That’s why he hedges. Only a fool would not.
Either: you have been suckered by the same words that May’s conspirators hope will sucker the Brexit-voting British public (hey, we’ve delivered Brexit! (whisper: in name only)) or: you just want to trash the very idea.
I do not know the ins and outs of Mr Mogg’s dealings, but Ireland is an attractive place to do business; it has a far lower and more attractive tax regime compared to that of the UK. In those circumstances, why not base your business there? This is one reason why Apple set up shop there, but of course, the EU have sought to get their claws into that arrangement.
I consider that if the UK does exit the EU, it too should become a low tax haven which would be an important magnet for business.
The UK government has been pretty hopeless. The EU has been worse.
First and foremost being Dutch you have rightly guessed that you have no say in British national politics. The original result was influenced by false information – mainly on the Remain side who said our economy would fall of a cliff the day after the referendum, that the pound would drop to the lowest level ever, even Cameron the snake said we risked WWIII. The remain side could not come up with a single good reason to stay in the EUSSR.
The government is conspiring to stop Brexit, and only a complete idiot would say otherwise.
What Rees-Mogg does with his money is up to him, and Farage’s children have a German Mother. They do not hold German passports – they hold EU passports issued by the German State, which is not quite the same thing. Look at your passport Ed – what are the first two words right at the very top of your passport? Shall I tell you?
Its
Europeese Unie
Koninkrijk Der Nederlanden
The Netherlands comes second
And then my name, the most important entry on the document, comes third.
Your point is?
That the EU have sovereignty over the Netherlands. Its laws have precedence over your own. You are a vassal state, effectively an occupied country just like you were under the Germans
how little things change!
The most important and the most fundamental lie was that on the remain side arguing the status quo. Namely that whatever the shortcomings of the EU may be, at least one knows where one stands and what the future holds.
However, in truth the electorate was faced with a choice of an uncertain future outside the EU, or an uncertain future within the EU.
The EU today is nothing like the EU of say 15 years ago, still less that of 40 years ago (when the UK first joined). The EU, if it exists at all, in 10 years time will be nothing like the EU of today. I personally dread to think what the EU will look like in 25 years time, although personally I doubt that it will still exist other than by way of a very loose association dealing with relatively few aspects of common interest.
In the debate, Remain never put forward a positive case for remaining within the EU, and that is simply because there is no such positive case. It is impossible to put forward a positive case extolling the virtues of the EU. That is why Remain sought to mislead with (i) project fear, and (ii) with the claim that the EU provides certainty, and stability, rather than uncertainty.
Richard, spot on. And you are not the only one: throughout Europe many are questioning the way the EU has gone, the Italians, the Polish, Hungarians, Austrians, parties in Germany, the Netherlands and so on. It all boils down to this: that the Lisbon treaty was a treaty too far. Some would claim even Maastricht was, but perhaps not. Imho the only thing that would prevent the union from collapsing is ditching Lisbon and go back to the status quo ante. But the precedent is not encouraging. Read about it in Genesis about that tower: those at the top are clamouring for higher and higher, ever wider vistas, ever bigger ambitions. But those at the bottom say that they can’t keep up and in the end lay down tools and the project collapses.
‘there is no need for a conspiracy when incompetence suffices.’
Absolutely priceless comment and sums up so many things in life, not just politics.
Like so many pro-EU shills, you intentionally confuse two utterly distinct entities, namely the Europe of nation states, and the European Commission.
Creative reading, such fun!
Ah, I’ve just twigged. You’re Feminist Solutions, that multi-headed troll. Nice to see you playing Dutch, a new breakthrough in your sad little life.
JF
Julian, I must give it to you. You take the biscuit.
I would be interested to know how you are adversely affected by the referendum result other than worrying completely pointlessly that you would be kicked out. There was never ever going to be an issue about Europeans residing and/or working in UK. Heck, it wasn’t even a problem before we joined the Common Market (as it was called to disguise the political objectives of the socialist architects of the project).
And I deprecate your use of innuendo to try to make a particularly unpleasant point. As Stephen Wilde has pointed out, Rees-Mogg has not moved his own funds to Ireland, his company has opened a an office in Dublin for the convenience of its clients who happen to live there. And are you suggesting that Farage knew so far in advance that this would happen that he married a German woman so that his kids could have a German passport.
That is almost as preposterous as the claim that man can possibly affect the climate by cutting back on CO2 output.
” eventhough the earlier result was undoubtedly infuenced by quite a bit of false information,”
From both sides….
“I also don’t think that the government is conspiring to reverse its result for the simple reason that there is no need for a conspiracy when incompetence suffices.”
Indeed it’s usually cock-up with British politicoes because conspiracy is harder and requires intelligence and talent.
“a certain Rees-Mogg whom most of you will have never heard of and a certain Farage of whom you probably have.”
Rees-Mogg doesn’t have the brains god endowed a whelk with and Mr Farage wears big floppy clown shoes… It shows the paucity of skill deployed when an intervention from vile huckster Peter Mandleson appears reasonable in comparison.
Mike Ozanne
Farage virtually masterminded the referendum. Cameron would never have held one had Farage not backed him into a corner.
Say what you want about his shoes, but I don’t think anyone can accuse him of being a stupid man.
Love eh ad hominems.
I wish I was so brainless as to be a multi-millionaire
You can tell when a poster has nothing worth listening to when their entire post is nothing but one ad hom after another.
JR-M got a History 2:1 from Trinity, Oxford so not brainless although Cathy Newman got an English 1st from Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford so perhaps you’re on to something after all.
Ed,
You say: “the earlier result was undoubtedly infuenced by quite a bit of false information, aka downright lies”.
You obviously think that the populace are easily influenced, and to state this on a public science forum would indicate that you had some special knowledge that allows you to quantify this effect.
So tell me; if the Government had not issued that deliberately scary leaflet to every household; Obama had not issued his warning about the UK ‘going to the back of the queue’ for trade talks; the Governor of the Bank of England had not issues his warning of financial and economic meltdown, plus all those Global Industry bosses threatening their UK employees with the sack…. etcetera….
And to give you some clue as to where the answer might lie, almost immediately after the referendum there was a General Election (a species of referendum, BTW) ….. in which 80% of the nation’s votes went to political parties that supported the referendum result.
In summary, Ed; if you cannot answer the question, I suggest you find some science to comment on, instead of broadcasting terminological inexactitudes that are frankly unbelievable.
Tony,
I must have hit a raw nerve somewhere where it was not intended, and not only with you. Whether the populace was easily influenced or not is neither here nor there. If you re-read my posting you may learn that I don’t question the referendum result at all, nor should I as it’s non of my business. However, I do remember a big number 350 on a bus. And that was a lie. That there was also a puerile project fear doesn’t undo that fact.
You may be surprised to learn that actually I supported Farage in his crusade against the EU burocracy by voting for his party in the Euro elections. Because I agree with the points he made about the democratic deficit. I was however, let’s say, rather disappointed when hearing about the passports of his children. Here again, the fact that his lady is German is neither here nor there. What is relevant is that those children are not affected by whatever outcome of the vote. Because they will have all the benefits of the dual nationality. Well, good for them. But most British youngsters do not have those benefits, which means that Nigel was campaigning for a result that would rob many British of future possibilities in the EU but not his own family. Somehow I find that distasteful, the more so when he never mentioned it during the campaign.
And then there is Mr Reese Mogg, whose supporters clearly bend over backwards to justify what to any objective observer is a cynical move to safeguard his income. And of course, the gentlemen himself puts a great deal of gloss on his actions. He would, wouldn’t he? But you can put as much lipstick on a pig as you want, it still is only a pig.
You claim;
“eventhough the earlier result was undoubtedly infuenced by quite a bit of false information, aka downright lies.”
After having been asked for the rationale behind your claim of relative certainty as indicated by your use of the word “undoubtedly”, you respond with
“… I don’t question the referendum result at all”
Pretty poor stuff, Ed.
Politicians are employed to get the best deal possible for their country or region. Trump is doing that. Putin is doing that. Both are therefore acting correctly.
Ours in the UK are not. Instead, they aim to get the best deal for their buddies in the Brussels bureaucracy. Because doing so benefits them personally. In other words, they are acting with a Conflict of Interests.
Just for the record, the “Pro Trump” rally (actually two demonstrations in support of Trump and Stephen Lennon) wasn’t banned at all.
For the sake of public order the police simply moved the starting point to avoid likely clashed between the 6-8000 attendees with the more than 100000 attending the protests against him.
Both protests still went ahead, only one (the smaller on…) resulted in violence and arrests.
Of course, if yoy subscribe the the whole Breitbart “no go areas in Birmingham” crap about how it is over here the rwal facts (as above) won’t alter your views.
Just wander around the East End of London with a girl in a summer dress and then tell me about no go areas.
Joe Horner
I understand that welcome supporters heading to the American Embassy were issued with public order notices not to congregate there.
And were the arrests made in the smaller rally, from protesters fighting amongst themselves, or were they provoked by others?
And who was arrested?
Yes,I remember the arrested trumpeted in the papers when Tommy Robinson was leader of the EDL.No mention in the media of the fact most were the anti fascist fascists.
Plus Americans were told to keep away as was not safe with the anti Trump fanatics about.
The anti-Trump events were heavily promoted in advance by the BBC and similar media, no mention was made of any pro-Trump events. Apparently the word “news” now also covers events in the future, how convenient for selective promotion of certain agendas, but with no obvious bias on display.
Lefties have rallies every other week, announce it and they will come.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pro-trump-rally-english-far-slideshow-wp-195653837/photo-p-free-tommy-robinson-supporters-photo-195653989.html
Pro-Trump rally by English far-right activists in London
Free Tommy Robinson supporters and pro-Trump supporters come together on Whitehall, London, for a joint rally in support of the visit of the U.S. president to the U.K. and calling for the release of jailed right-wing activist Tommy
In the views of the left anyone to the right of them, is far right.
There is no such thing as reasonable disagreement with their policies.
Ghalfrunt
From your link:
Is there a swastika, balaclava or jack boot in sight?
Since when is it far right to display, or march with a national flag?
Most of the people in that ‘article’ are working class and probably support the labour party.
I’m as far right as anyone can get, I’m a member of the UK Libertarian Party which supports free speech, small government, democratic representation, and the rule of law.
What’s branded as the far right, the swastika brandishing thugs and their cousins, antifa, are Fascist’s, a product largely of the left. Think Mussolini who invented Fascism, and Hitler, who admired him. Both left wing.
LOL: “Both left wing.”
…
So HotScot, explain to everyone reading here why the brown shirts in Germany attacked the Communists?
Hitler attacked Russia due to his frustration at not being able to defeat England and his need for OIL !! “Brownshirts had nothing to do with it until the end…(If you mean German Communists…
“The day after the fire, Hitler asked for, and received, from President Hindenburg, the Reichstag Fire Decree, signed into law by Hindenburg using Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution. The Reichstag Fire Decree suspended most civil liberties in Germany, including habeas corpus, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, the right of free association and public assembly, the secrecy of the post and telephone.[11] These rights were not reinstated during Nazi reign. The decree was used by the Nazis to ban publications not considered “friendly” to the Nazi cause. Despite the fact that Marinus van der Lubbe claimed to have acted alone in the Reichstag fire, Hitler, after having obtained his emergency powers, announced that it was the start of a Communist plot to take over Germany. Nazi newspapers blared this “news”.[11] This sent the Germans into a panic and isolated the Communists further among the civilians; additionally, thousands of Communists were imprisoned in the days following the fire (including leaders of the Communist Party of Germany) on the charge that the Party was preparing to stage a putsch. Speaking to Rudolph Diels about Communists during the Reichstag fire, Hitler said “These sub-humans do not understand how the people stand at our side. In their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come, of course they hear nothing of the cheering of the masses.”[12] With Communist electoral participation also suppressed (the Communists previously polled 17% of the vote), the Nazis were able to increase their share of the vote in the 5 March 1933, Reichstag elections from 33% to 44%.[13] This gave the Nazis and their allies, the German National People’s Party (who won 8% of the vote), a majority of 52% in the Reichstag.[13]
Marcus, please read up on the Brown shirts . They were in existence before the failed Munich Putsch
https://www.britannica.com/topic/SA-Nazi-organization
As I said, “Brown Shirts” had nothing to do with the attack on Russia. If you mean German Communists IN Germany, please see above !!
C. Paul Pierett
The brown shirts didn’t just attack communists. They were used to patrol nazi rallies, and disrupt any opposition rallies.
“LOL”.
Since you claim the brown shirts were “leftists” then the communists were not the “opposition.”
..
You seem to have your left and right confused.
C. Paul Pierett
Mussolini and Hitler were products of the left who turned to fascism.
Why must I spell everything out for you?
Go and do some research on the subject.
Fascism is right wing, pure and simple. You seem to be lacking in historical acumen. Goldberg (National Review) is pedaling garbage.
Fascism is a form of socialism. Always has been.
Just because you are an economic illiterate, don’t assume that everyone else is.
You are wrong. Under fascism, the means of production remained in control of the capitalists. In Germany and in Italy, the factory owners did not lose their ownership. They kept their profits.
Also MarkW, there is more to fascism than economics. It had a lot to do with politics, ethnic membership, nationalism, social class and authoritarianism.
Read the speeches of Joseph Goebbels. ‘We are anti-capitalists’.
Fascism is a method. Based on a collectivist vision of society where the individual is subject to the state and the party is always right. The method was applied by M, H, Stalin Mao, Pol Pot, Maduro, Mugabe and a whole list of other dictators and autocrats.
It really is sad how trolls actually think that just because two groups are on the left, they should automatically love and work with each other.
Markw
There I was thinking you were cured and you go and mention trolls.
They were the competition, not the opposition.
Communists always attack those who threaten their power.
Most of the people killed by Stalin were communists.
The German Communists didn’t have any power when the brown shirts attacked. You seem to confuse who was attacked and who did the attacking.
C. Paul Pierett
“The German Communists didn’t have any power when the brown shirts attacked.”
Neither did Hitler you muppet. He banned them the day after his election in 1933.
And later he invited the remaining ones to join the NSDAP, which most of them did.
A better likeness”
How juvenile of you Z.
But then again, it’s all you got, so make the most of it.
You asked for it.
Portraying Trump and Putin as gay in a denigrating way is not going to make you or the New York Times any friends in the gay community.
zazove
I expect you’re a supermodel.
The poms have gone to the dogs.
Some of us have escaped neutering though.
No, just led by one.
What is the “blatant judicial mistreatment” you are referring to ??
Despite whether you agree with Tommy or not he was stupid enough to do his “reporting” in earshot of the jury outside the courthouse, as jurors were entering. That not only risks perverting the course of justice but could lead to a mistrial and help the pedo raping defendants.
He had previously been tried and sentenced (suspended) for the same thing and told any further breach would be contempt of court and he would get jail time for it.
I’m all for his speaking out about these asian men targeting young white girls and the lack of prosecutions for fear of not being politically correct. More power to him.
The trouble is he blatantly when against the conditions of his suspended sentence and what he did IS CONTEMPT OF COURT.
It was more the speed of it compared to normal plus his solicitor was told no rush so she couldn,t represent him.Then there was the unduly harsh sentence compared to their normal tap on the wrist.That’s what got everyone riled.
davmc
Here’s the truth of the matter.
HotScot
I don’t understand why your posting of this video news broadcast attracted several negative votes. Having watched it, I thought it was a fair and balanced report of the facts.
While I have some admiration for Tommy Robinson, notably his cojones, I think he was being somewhat foolhardy in doing as he did on this occasion. Yes, I think his sentence was too severe but I can also see that the Court wanted to deter other likely violations of a similar Court edict.
Luc Ozade
Some people just refuse to face facts. If their conspiracy theories are disproven they don’t accept it.
As for his sentence, Robinson undermined the foundation of the British Criminal Justice System. Contempt of court is up there with perverting the course of justice in terms of obstructing justice.
The very people he was campaigning against could have been set free because of him. No one could accuse him of being a stupid man, so he knew what he was doing and I can only assume it was a publicity stunt as he’s now a minor celebrity.
The more often he does these thing, the more publicity he raises, the more support he gets, and the more interviews he does claiming the Police are corrupt. That’s all money for him and I think he’s realised there’s as much to be earned from infamy as there is from fame.
The CJS in any country is an easy target as it rarely reacts to justify its actions. It’s processes and methods are under constant scrutiny and they will be extraordinarily careful when dealing with Robinson because of his penchant for publicity.
The justice system explained in that video is precisely the justice system climate sceptics want for their case, but it’s now contaminated by too many conspiracy theories and the downvotes perhaps demonstrate a certain mind set.
It is difficult for anyone to comment because none of us know the precise restrictions placed on him, nor precisely what went on.
However what we do know is that the punishment is disproportionate.
First, the sentence runs consecutively which is almost unheard of in UK law. You can have murderers, burglars, rapists that have carried out multiple offences, but the sentences almost never run consecutively. Further, frequently multiple crimes are not even adjudicated upon, and are simply swept under the carpet in the notion of taking them into consideration without actually adding to the jail time.
Second, you can kill people and get less than 15 months in jail, eg death by dangerous driving, or other manslaughter event.
“First, the sentence runs consecutively which is almost unheard of in UK law.”
Unless you are stupid enough to commit a repeat offense when you already under a suspended sentence, in which case it is standard practice :
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/types-of-sentence/suspended-sentences/
The Court has a discretion as to sentencing, although there are various guidelines that must be taken into account, but not necessarily followed.
In fact the Judge’s discretion is particularly wide when it comes to contempt, and no doubt this impacted upon the Judge’s decision in the Robinson case, since it is very difficult to challenge a Judge in those circumstances.
However, just to give you an illustration where a person was under a suspended sentence, committed another crime and did not even serve jail time, see:
http://www.pumpcourtchambers.com/news/man-spared-custody-following-breach-suspended-sentence
There is no doubt that the Robinson sentence is extremely harsh, and does not reflect what more usually takes place in the UK
“However, just to give you an illustration where a person was under a suspended sentence,”
And note this:
“The Judge informed the Defendant that he should be under no illusions: the normal course of action would be to activate the suspended sentence. ”
I.e this chap is a *very* lucky puppy and is getting unusual treatment no doubt backed up by *actual evidence* to support his brief’s plea for mitigation. “Robinson” was given a lenient sentence… less than half of the maximum for the offense but was given entirely standard treatment when his suspension was activated and tacked on. Something he was explicitly and clearly warned about by the judge at his first sentencing I quote :
“The sentence, therefore, that I pass upon you, taking
into account all of those matters that have been
placed before me and your admissions entered via Mr.
Kovalevsky, is one of three months’ imprisonment which
will be suspended for a period of 18 months. That
will be suspended. There will be no conditions that
need to be attached to that suspended sentence, but
you should be under no illusions that if you commit
any further offence of any kind, and that would
include, I would have thought a further contempt of
court by similar actions, then that sentence of three
months would be activated, and that would be on top of
anything else that you were given by any other court.
In short, Mr. Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court,
refer to people as “Muslim paedophiles, Muslim
rapists” and so on and so forth while trials are
ongoing and before there has been a finding by a jury
that that is what they are, and you will find yourself
inside. Do you understand? Thank you very much. ”
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/coc-yaxley-lennon-20170522.pdf
There is absolutely no doubt that Yaxley-Lennon was treated fairly, progressively and leniently by the courts. And if he doesn’t like where he is he has only himself to blame.
Those of our American cousins who feel our standards of liberty fall short should bear in mind that in 28 states of the Union his rap sheet would likely have him doing life as a three striker and not attending protest meetings at all.
“Second, you can kill people and get less than 15 months in jail, eg death by dangerous driving, ”
The minimum range for causing death by dangerous driving is 2 to 5 years with a starting point of three, so no…..
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/web_causing_death_by_driving_definitive_guideline.pdf
Time actually served may end up less.. good behaviour and so on, but those apply to wee Tommy as well….
Why? SadIQ Kahn.
It wasn’t banned at all, do a few seconds of research. I really don’t get why this site has turned into a political platform. Go back enough years and this was one of the few places worth looking at because most of the other sceptics were just chasing an agenda (and were hence pretty much the same as most of the AGW supporters). Now I’m starting to consider it an embarrassment that I still come here to see if something proper has been posted.
Perhaps a reaction to the fact climate change was made political by the man made global warming believers.
The AGW (aka the climate change aka the greenhouse effect) was never about science. It was about money, power, and politics right from the beginning.
A demonstration was not banned, but the pro-Trump demonstration at the embassy was definitely banned.
Dirk M
That is an unfair and inaccurate criticism of this site.
With an average of 8 – 10 new posts per day (and the majority dealing with serious science subjects) I see nothing wrong with this article – supporting a man who has done more to debunk the fr@ud of climate change than almost anyone else in politics.
Mr Trump has my total support. I am a UK resident, born and bred. I don’t do protest marches: too old, live too far away and I have better things to do with my time.
The anti-Trump protesters were obviously the usual rent-a-mob crowd: probably living on benefits, plenty of free time, just simple useful idiots and agitators. Look at the well organised placards… it’s what they do. Brain-washed idiots. It makes me sick to my stomach to see the leftist news media fawning over them, giving them a platform to say what THEY think (or rather what they’re told to think – that is, if they even can think).
Unfortunately, I don’t think anything is likely to change in the foreseeable future either.
Luc Ozade
Well said sir. From a fellow Brit.
My daughter and boyfriend were on those demonstrations. Both Oxford graduates in good jobs. Classic members of the liberal elite who get the most upset when challenged.
Susan, are you bragging or complaining? 🙂
Dirk, If you do not understand by now that AGW is all about politics, power, money and control then you have missed the very essence of what is happening. The AGW crowd and their allies on the political left flatly refuse to admit when they have something wrong. That they manipulate data to fit a preconceived conclusions has nothing to do with what the climate is doing. That regularly “scientific papers” are published stating some horror will be caused by AGW if we, primarily the USA, EU and Australia, do something today. Various green groups, most socialist groups, and our Democratic Party all talk about the doom and gloom happen day after tomorrow due to AGW. Even when model predictions fail to come true they spin the reality. As I was once told by a very good scientist relative to a completely different topic, “Son, it is always about politics. How else would we get funded, publish and have our finding affect public policy.” Thing with AGW it moved from small “p” politics to national and world big “p” politics. A question to topic to ponder: We often hear about how the poor people of the world will suffer more from the effects of AGW than any others. How do you think the poor people of the world will benefit most, rise up from poverty, by abiding by the AGW radical agenda or by having access to reliable and abundant energy? The choice between the two is not science but political.
All the marches took place, but not necessarily where they were originally planned. I suspect the the pro-Trump march (not to be confused with the Free Tommy Robinson march) was more an anti-anti-Trump march.
I also suspect that all participants were totally unrepresentative of the vast majority of the UK.
“I also suspect that all participants were totally unrepresentative of the vast majority of the UK.”
Most of us enjoyed the footie and the tennis and the glorious not as hot and dry as it was 40 years ago summer weather. Conducting valuable empiric studies into why the melting polar ice cap shouldn’t worry us. Because when the ice in my G&T melts it doesn’t overflow…
Peter Plail
Let me get this right.
The pro-Trump march was more an anti-anti-Trump march.
“…….all participants were totally unrepresentative of the vast majority of the UK”
So what you’re saying is that the vast majority of the UK is pro-Trump.
I’m sure he’ll be very pleased to hear that.
This all sounds like the talk among the passengers on the deck of the Mayflower.
Grooming gang? Apparently the UK doesn’t want to deal with this effectively because it involves rapes and other crimes committed by racial minorities. Perhaps they’re afraid of appearing to be racist. As one blog commenter noted:
I haven’t been following this closely but it sure looks like racist attacks on white women. The Social Justice Warriors (SJW) insist that it isn’t possible to be racist against, the axiomatically defined, privileged whites. That’s a big problem.
Is this one reason why the Brexit supporters want to be able to control immigration. I will say, from the left side of the pond, British immigration looks nasty. Cory Doctorow had a miserable time being allowed to stay in Britain. He finally gave up and left. link So, we have Americans and Canadians with highly desirable skills who can’t get into the UK. At the same time the UK seems to be admitting all kinds of people who might best be termed a waste of DNA.
What is going on?
“Grooming gang? Apparently the UK doesn’t want to deal with this effectively ”
29 people have been arrested charged and sent to trial, how much more effective an action do you want?
“As one blog commenter noted:
If it were a white grooming gang, all the liberal media outlets would be writing dozens of articles and all guns blazing on white people. But when its Muslims who are perpetraters, liberal media dissapears into silence. link”
If it were a white grooming gang, exactly the same reporting restrictions to ensure a fair trial would be in place.
” British immigration looks nasty. Cory Doctorow had a miserable time being allowed to stay in Britain. He finally gave up and left. link ”
And nowhere in the linked article does he mention having any issues with work permits or right of residence or in fact anything to do with immigration policy. He does drone on about why he doesn’t *like* London….
“So, we have Americans and Canadians with highly desirable skills who can’t get into the UK.”
And yet according to the ONS 294,000 North Americans seem to have managed it….
Data set from here :
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/datasets/populationoftheunitedkingdombycountryofbirthandnationality
It took many years before the British Establishment dared to take on the pedophile rape gangs in Rotherham and elsewhere lest it was accused of racism or Islamophobia. Interestingly enough, the prosecutor who finally got the ball rolling and secured the first convictions was Nazir Afzal, who, being of Pakistani Muslim background, was immune to the usual smears of racism/Islamophobia.
And since Rotherham the story has been all over the mainstream media. Tommy Robinson is not a voice crying in the wilderness.
I hate the use of the expression grooming, when we are talking about rape.
I think ‘grooming’ refers to the process by which the perpetrators lure girls into their clutches. link Grooming is a crime in most English speaking jurisdictions (in Canada it’s called luring) and can lead to jail time even without actual rape. Similar to white slavers, these animals target the vulnerable, those with mental health or drug problems.
Somewhat related: The mayor of Toronto, John Tory called some gun toting thugs, sewer rats. Those thugs happened to be black so now some folks are accusing Tory of being a racist. link Folks who get into a gun fight in a playground full of kids are indeed sewer rats. I don’t care what color they are.
Yes, but what we are talking about is rape on an industrial scale.
Not least because many of the girls involved are underage, where irrespective of whether consent was given (freely or via coercion or otherwise), it is assumed that consent cannot be given, and it is statutory rape.
If society cannot protect its children, and the vulnerable, there is something seriously wrong with it.
The problem with peaceful marches in support of Trump, is that the lefty fa.scist UAF th.ugs turn up and cause a riot. These are the same black-dressed balclava and mask wearing th.ugs that protest against Trump in America.
However, the worrying thing about these fa.scist UAF th.ugs, is that they are organised from inside the offices of NAFTHE – yes, from inside the offices of the UK university lecturers union. And this, is the perilous state of UK education. And from what I hear, the American education system is in the same perilous state.
R
Quite a few conservative events have been canceled on American college campuses because the administration “was afraid of potential violence”.
Whilst I agree with most of what you say, Tommy Robinson is not a journalist and he was in contempt of court technically, but otherwise you are spot on. Although the general public haven’t made the Green/left/EU connection yet.
Hey maybe Trump will ban the export of wood pellets from U.S. clear cut forests for UK boilers. Think positive.
I don’t consider myself to be a socialist, sometimes I think I am slightly right of fascist but that’s a different story. On some subjects such as looking after people genuinely in need and looking after the environment I’m slightly left of communist. But I am a CAGW sceptic through and through.
My gut feeling is the majority of people in the UK don’t really care about the USA and certainly don’t care for Trump. Let’s be honest, he needs to steer clear of twitter.
When it comes to Tommy Robinson (not his real name ), I afraid Eric Worrall has it completely wrong.
Robinson is an obnoxious character who disguises his racism by pretending to be “a man of the people”. He’s not.
He’s in jail for one very good reason. He streamed a video of defendants entering a court room despite a court order being in place to prevent all reporters from doing so. He deserves his jail sentence.
Richard Toll is absolutely spot on.
If you want to help people. Do it yourself.
It does you no credit whatsoever to have government seize someone else’s wealth in order to give it to those you deem more worthy.
I do, it’s called compassion.
I think in a civilised society, it’s right to help those that are genuinely in need.
Note I said the word genuinely again, I’m not talking about he takers, the bone idle shirkers in society. As far as I am concerned, they can get off their fat arses and do what I had to do to put food in their mouths.
I am taking about the people who for whatever reason cannot look after themselves, What is society supposed to do with these people, take them into the woods and let them die?
Not in my world.
MangoChutney
“sometimes I think I am slightly right of fascist”
Need to get your context correct mate. Fascism was a the brainchild of Mussolini. He was left wing, as was his father, for many years until he was kicked out the party. He converted to the right wing for a short period before he was also kicked out, so he started his own political utopia, fascism.
His methods, the blackshirts amongst others, were admired by Hitler who was a member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, a left wing organisation. How on earth would anyone confuse a socialist German workers party with the right wing? But Wikipedia does it with amazing sleight of hand….well, not really, clumsy and ridiculous is the description most apt. No one on the right would vote for socialism, but read the first lines of Wikipedia on the subect if you want a laugh.
“The National Socialist German Workers’ Party, commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party was a far-right political party in Germany that was active between 1920 and 1945 and supported the ideology of Nazism. Its precursor, the German Workers’ Party existed from 1919 to 1920.
The Nazi Party emerged from the German nationalist, racist and populist Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against the communist uprisings in post-World War I Germany. The party was created as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism. Initially, Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois and anti-capitalist rhetoric, although such aspects were later downplayed in order to gain the support of industrial entities and in the 1930’s the party’s focus shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.”
Right wing? Seriously?
I’m right wing, as far right as you can get, I’m a member of the UK Libertarian party. A legitimate political organisation that believes in free speech, democracy, small government, and the rule of law.
I neither condone, identify with, associate with, or support fascism, socialism or communism in any form.
The idea that somehow Hitler was right wing and fascism is right wing, and the ‘far right’ are right wing is utterly preposterous. They conform to no right wing values; freedom of speech, the free market economy, equality, diversity, democracy, light touch government, capitalism, a classless society, personal choice etc.
And within right wing values, there is the capacity for the support of the weaker members of our society, just not freeloaders.
Capitalism, as a condensed expression of the right, has been with us since man first slithered onto the planet. Free trade is the foundation of humanity, we started with shells, fish hooks and services. Read Matt Ridleys book, ‘The Rational Optimist’ to understand how man evolved through free trade.
Socialism is a political construct, an idealistic utopia, dreamed up by a champagne swilling dropout, Marx. And it has failed, at every touch-point in it’s existence.
So please readjust your political compass and begin to understand that there is no such thing as the far right. There is the right. Then there is the left, the far left, fascism, then communism, and they encompass everything unsavoury in humanity.
But don’t misunderstand me, the right isn’t perfect, but it’s a lot closer than the left, never mind the rest.
Fair comment, @HotScot
“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
— Adolf Hitler, May 1, 1927, Berlin May Day Speech
This article isn’t quite accurate. But that’s no surprise…
There was a rally outside the US Embassy. (A rally, not a march.) It was organised by London UKIP. It was banned, and then un-banned, and did eventually go ahead. But police misled some people into thinking that it had been cancelled.
On the same day there was a separate event in central London in support of Tommy Robinson. Some of the same people would have attended each event.
See here: http://kippercentral.com/2018/07/15/exclusive-how-the-police-tried-to-keep-me-away-from-the-trump-tommy-rallies/