International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Non-USA & General Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   General UK politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=346868)

Filippo Lippi 2nd July 2021 02:42 AM

I think someone claimed that he was an "honest, decent, honourable man." Could anything be further from the truth?

Captain_Swoop 2nd July 2021 02:47 AM

Jones, Galloway, Farage, Robinson, the other ones.
They're a separate group, could be any party just so long as it's a platform for them.

Captain_Swoop 2nd July 2021 02:50 AM

'Mobile exoparasites' as someone on twitter called them.

'Carpetbaggers' is what they used to be called in the 'old days'

Carrot Flower King 2nd July 2021 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13525055)
'Mobile exoparasites' as someone on twitter called them.

'Carpetbaggers' is what they used to be called in the 'old days'

Or just plain twats...

Captain_Swoop 2nd July 2021 11:49 AM

Sarah Vine "I ask people to respect my privacy"
Why? She said Meghan and Harry weren’t entitled to privacy because they ‘were public figures’.

zooterkin 2nd July 2021 01:34 PM

Marina Hyde on the odious hat-wearing twat. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...pen-byelection

KDLarsen 2nd July 2021 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13525055)
'Mobile exoparasites' as someone on twitter called them.

'Carpetbaggers' is what they used to be called in the 'old days'

'Carpetbagger' was the phrase used by David Lammy to describe Galloway :)

https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/statu...64851061194755

Worm 2nd July 2021 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zooterkin (Post 13525527)
Marina Hyde on the odious hat-wearing twat. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...pen-byelection

lol. "Each time he turns up, it’s as if he’s answered some invisible twat signal." Beautiful.

Vixen 3rd July 2021 03:25 AM

So the reference to Sarah Vine's recent article was prescient. All sorts of rumours flying that Gove has either set up with a male special advisor or the male tv presenter doctor who presented 'Embarrassing Bodies', so if he, he will have seen worse than Gove's. If a superinjunction has been issued to suppress this news, then there is also inherent in the issuing of a superinjunction that the superinjunction is secret. Therefore, I cannot possibly know anything about one and the rumours should be treated simply as that.

Sarah Vine won't mind as - hey! - she is a gossip writer herself, who loves to stick her nose into the private lives of others and stir up right wing bigots into a frenzy by use of innuendo and double-entendre wording.

Whilst the end of any long-term relationship is sad, and the pair have my sympathy, it is difficult to avoid schadenfreude. Some 'rich exotic stuff' being introduced into her family.

Quote:

Gove had been among those tipped to take over from Hancock, but Sajid Javid was appointed. Hancock said he did not want his personal issues to “distract attention”, apologised for breaking Covid rules, and said he needed to be “with my children at this time”.

Samantha Cameron’s sister, Emily Sheffield, the editor of the Evening Standard, said it was sad to hear of the divorce. “Any family breakup is tough for all involved,” she said.
GUARDIAN

So now we know why she was buttering up Sam Cam the day before. Gotta have a shoulder to cry on.

Boo-hoo.

P.J. Denyer 3rd July 2021 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13525443)
Sarah Vine "I ask people to respect my privacy"
Why? She said Meghan and Harry weren’t entitled to privacy because they ‘were public figures’.

Isn't life a bitch? Hey, now there's a coincidence.

Captain_Swoop 3rd July 2021 03:49 PM

A few weeks ago Priti attacked the England team for 'taking the knee'.
She said fans were right to boo them for dong it.
Boris too wouldn't condemn fans for booing them.

Tonight they think they are great and the team are heroes


Priti tweeted

@pritipatel
Ok
What a performance.
What a team.
#ItsComingHome!

a_unique_person 3rd July 2021 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13525051)
Jones, Galloway, Farage, Robinson, the other ones.

They're a separate group, could be any party just so long as it's a platform for them.

Johnson. You left off Johnson. His greatest regret about being PM is that he doesn't have time to appear on "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me out of Here".

Vixen 4th July 2021 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13526325)
A few weeks ago Priti attacked the England team for 'taking the knee'.
She said fans were right to boo them for dong it.
Boris too wouldn't condemn fans for booing them.

Tonight they think they are great and the team are heroes


Priti tweeted

@pritipatel
Ok
What a performance.
What a team.
#ItsComingHome!

As I recall Boris was all for taking the knee and was said to have given Patel a dressing down for her comments. Perhaps you are thinking of Rees-Mogg, who agreed with Priti.

One down side to England winning is it'll encourage the Brexiteers to be more unbearable than ever.

Captain_Swoop 4th July 2021 03:52 AM

No, Boris also said he wouldn't condemn fans for booing the England team

Mojo 4th July 2021 04:14 AM

Boris Johnson refuses to condemn fans booing England taking the knee

Quote:

The prime minister “fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known”

Garrison 4th July 2021 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13526641)
As I recall Boris was all for taking the knee and was said to have given Patel a dressing down for her comments. Perhaps you are thinking of Rees-Mogg, who agreed with Priti.

One down side to England winning is it'll encourage the Brexiteers to be more unbearable than ever.

I'm not sure, the team is a bit 'multicultural' for their tastes.

Carrot Flower King 4th July 2021 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrison (Post 13526697)
I'm not sure, the team is a bit 'multicultural' for their tastes.

Yeah, Yorkshiremen AND Mackems...

Ulf Nereng 4th July 2021 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13526641)
As I recall Boris was all for taking the knee and was said to have given Patel a dressing down for her comments. Perhaps you are thinking of Rees-Mogg, who agreed with Priti.

One down side to England winning is it'll encourage the Brexiteers to be more unbearable than ever.

I'm worried that they'll be more hateful than ever if England loses. :(

Captain_Swoop 4th July 2021 03:02 PM

Money-grabbing Rishi Sunak is set to kick retired miners and their families in the teeth by holding on to billions of pounds that is rightfully theirs.
The Chancellor is on Monday expected to block the return of £1.2billion from the Miners’ Pension Fund reserve, as demanded by MPs.

And the Treasury will continue with plans to take another £1.6billion on top of the £4.4billion it has already pocketed from the fund’s surplus.
That means 124,000 miners will not get the £14 weekly rise they hoped for. Their average pension is £84 a week.
The row dates back to 1994, when British Coal was privatised and ministers agreed the Government would be guarantor for its pension payouts.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...iners-24454613

Levelling up.

Well done to all the new Tory voters in the old mining communities.

Vixen 5th July 2021 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13527140)
Money-grabbing Rishi Sunak is set to kick retired miners and their families in the teeth by holding on to billions of pounds that is rightfully theirs.
The Chancellor is on Monday expected to block the return of £1.2billion from the Miners’ Pension Fund reserve, as demanded by MPs.

And the Treasury will continue with plans to take another £1.6billion on top of the £4.4billion it has already pocketed from the fund’s surplus.
That means 124,000 miners will not get the £14 weekly rise they hoped for. Their average pension is £84 a week.
The row dates back to 1994, when British Coal was privatised and ministers agreed the Government would be guarantor for its pension payouts.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...iners-24454613

Levelling up.

Well done to all the new Tory voters in the old mining communities.

A relative who retired in 1991 aged 59 was getting about £340 pcm from his occupational pension (over and above the state pension) so an average for miners of £84 pw = £364 pcm thirty years on, is pretty poor for such a heavy duty job, from which many have to retire early with lung problems. Having said that, pensions pre-2008 were so much better all round anyway, thanks to the economy, so might not be a good comparison.

RolandRat 5th July 2021 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zooterkin (Post 13525527)
Marina Hyde on the odious hat-wearing twat. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...pen-byelection

From that link:

"The three most prominent hat-wearing guys in public life are George Galloway, weirdo anatomist Gunther von Hagens, and that rapist who used to own Blackpool football club. Sorry, but case closed."

:D

catsmate 5th July 2021 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RolandRat (Post 13527469)
From that link:

"The three most prominent hat-wearing guys in public life are George Galloway, weirdo anatomist Gunther von Hagens, and that rapist who used to own Blackpool football club. Sorry, but case closed."

:D

I'm hesitant to mention Ian Bailey.....

MarkCorrigan 5th July 2021 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RolandRat (Post 13527469)
From that link:

"The three most prominent hat-wearing guys in public life are George Galloway, weirdo anatomist Gunther von Hagens, and that rapist who used to own Blackpool football club. Sorry, but case closed."

:D

But I like Gunter von Hagens.

P.J. Denyer 5th July 2021 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan (Post 13527662)
But I like Gunter von Hagens.

I was just thinking the comparison seems a bit harsh on him.

Carrot Flower King 6th July 2021 09:49 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...analysis-shows

I feel very conflicted about this one.

On the one hand it is just ******* typical of how Tories **** up the NHS and MH services especially (I'm counting the 2010-15 gubbmint as Tory as the Lib Dems did nothing meaningful to prevent it- I mean look at the Orange Book...), despite a whole load of lies about "spending extra money" and "parity".

On the other hand, I've taken much flak in various parts of the internet over the years for citing internal trust documents (so obviously I can't supply full documentary proof) which I saw back in 2010-11 at work (senior nurse in a large MH trust, so I was on the mailing lists for most things and at a load of meetings where such things were discussed) which told us to expect cuts to clinical services of up to 25% over the next decade. And folk wouldn't believe me as I couldn't provide the documents...Well, told you so, didn't I?

Why folk vote for these despicable ******* is beyond me.

Captain_Swoop 6th July 2021 03:50 PM

Morecambe Tory MP David Morris has called local head teachers and GP's who talked of hungry and impoverished children as "Lefty Troublemakers".


Do you think any of the northern constituencies that went Tory at the least election will start to see the light?

Captain_Swoop 7th July 2021 03:19 AM

The new Nationality and Borders Bill allows for asylum claims to be declared inadmissible if an asylum applicant is an EU citizen.
Also differential treatment and accommodation of asylum seekers will be allowed depending on their mode of entry and stage of their claim.

There is a power for the Secretary of State to delay or even suspend visa processing for citizens of countries which she believes uncooperative with removals.

The offence of illegal entry is being re-written and will attract a maximum sentence of up to four years in prison rather than the 6 months max at the moment. Any asylum seeker knowingly arriving without entry clearance or entering the UK without permission (“leave”) to enter will have committed an offence and be subject to prosecution and prison.

Helping an asylum seeker enter the UK will no longer need to be “for gain” to attract criminal liability.

It now says
A person commits an offence if—
(a) he knowingly facilitates the arrival or attempted arrival in, or the entry or attempted entry into, the United Kingdom of an individual, and
(b) he knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the individual is an asylum-seeker.

The maximum sentence for the general assisting unlawful immigration offence is raised to life in prison.
This is obviously aimed at 'boat traffickers' but it means that anyone rescuing a drowning person and bringing them ashore is committing an offence.

At the Moment the RNLI lifeboats are rescuing people from sinking boats and bringing them ashore. If the bill passes they will be committing an offence as they are not a government organisation or a charity dedicated to assisting asylum seekers.

Captain_Swoop 7th July 2021 03:23 AM

Maritime law says you have an obligation to assist those in danger at sea.

If the bill passes as it is anyone you rescue would have to be taken to somewhere outside the UK if you thought they might be asylum seekers.

Vixen 7th July 2021 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13529143)
The new Nationality and Borders Bill allows for asylum claims to be declared inadmissible if an asylum applicant is an EU citizen.
Also differential treatment and accommodation of asylum seekers will be allowed depending on their mode of entry and stage of their claim.

There is a power for the Secretary of State to delay or even suspend visa processing for citizens of countries which she believes uncooperative with removals.

The offence of illegal entry is being re-written and will attract a maximum sentence of up to four years in prison rather than the 6 months max at the moment. Any asylum seeker knowingly arriving without entry clearance or entering the UK without permission (“leave”) to enter will have committed an offence and be subject to prosecution and prison.

Helping an asylum seeker enter the UK will no longer need to be “for gain” to attract criminal liability.

It now says
A person commits an offence if—
(a) he knowingly facilitates the arrival or attempted arrival in, or the entry or attempted entry into, the United Kingdom of an individual, and
(b) he knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the individual is an asylum-seeker.

The maximum sentence for the general assisting unlawful immigration offence is raised to life in prison.
This is obviously aimed at 'boat traffickers' but it means that anyone rescuing a drowning person and bringing them ashore is committing an offence.

At the Moment the RNLI lifeboats are rescuing people from sinking boats and bringing them ashore. If the bill passes they will be committing an offence as they are not a government organisation or a charity dedicated to assisting asylum seekers.

Surely either you or the Home Secretary is confusing 'illegal immigrants' with 'asylum seekers'. Asylum seekers are recognised under international law. It cannot be a crime to seek asylum.

Vixen 7th July 2021 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13529147)
Maritime law says you have an obligation to assist those in danger at sea.

If the bill passes as it is anyone you rescue would have to be taken to somewhere outside the UK if you thought they might be asylum seekers.

Heh. It's a long way to Rwanda on a plastic dinghy.

Captain_Swoop 7th July 2021 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13529171)
Surely either you or the Home Secretary is confusing 'illegal immigrants' with 'asylum seekers'. Asylum seekers are recognised under international law. It cannot be a crime to seek asylum.

It's not my Bill.

Darat 7th July 2021 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 13529171)
Surely either you or the Home Secretary is confusing 'illegal immigrants' with 'asylum seekers'. Asylum seekers are recognised under international law. It cannot be a crime to seek asylum.

It's up to the UK parliament to decide what is a crime or not.

KDLarsen 8th July 2021 01:41 AM

To the surprise of absolutely noone, the House of Commons Standards committee has cleared Johnson over his lack of candour over who paid for his vacation to Mustique in December 2019 (it was eventually made clear it was David Ross, the millionaire Tory donor).

Remarkably however, the committee rejected the finding by the parliamentary commissioner for standards, that Johnson had broken the rules, arguing that it was eventually rooted out who had paid for it anyway. They even note that Johnson had previously (twice in the space of four months) been dinged for the exact same thing, but chose to merely label it "regrettable".

All via the Guardian's live politics commentary.

Edit: The parliamentary commissioner for standards report is quite damning, it's included as an appendix to the formal report clearing him:
Quote:

Mr Johnson’s holiday took place in December 2019 and January 2020. I would have expected him, before he arrived on the island of Mustique, to find out definitively who was to fund the free accommodation he had been offered, and what arrangements had been made to pay for it. He needed to have this information before he decided whether it was right to accept this benefit, and so that full details could be registered within 28 days ...

It has been unusually difficult to find facts during this lengthy investigation. After an inquiry lasting more than a year, I have not found any reliable documentary that clearly outlines the arrangements for how Mr Johnson’s holiday accommodation was paid. I am therefore not able to reach a view on whether Mr Johnson’s register entry was accurate and complete ...

I have also not been able to establish the basis on which the benefit received by Mr Johnson was valued at £15,000. I have however no reason to dispute that the villa could have been charged out at £15,000 for a last-minute booking for a party of similar size to Mr Johnson’s and in similar circumstances, from 26 December 2019 to 5 January 2020.

Mr Johnson was right to name [David] Ross in his register entry as the person who played a key role in obtaining a villa for Mr Johnson’s use. I accept that Mr Johnson had originally expected that the villa would be owned by Mr Ross. I find it surprising that, when he realised that he was to stay elsewhere, Mr Johnson did not establish the full facts about who was the owner of the villa, how the villa would be funded and the value of the benefit, before accepting the accommodation as a gift. Mr Johnson has told me that he believes the owners received a payment for his use of the accommodation. At another point he told me that Mr Ross arranged to meet the “notional costs” by making his own villa available to the Mustique Company on future dates. He has not explained how these two accounts relate to each other ...
https://committees.parliament.uk/pub...71459/default/

Captain_Swoop 8th July 2021 02:30 AM

BBC on the subject

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57761943

Vixen 8th July 2021 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDLarsen (Post 13530229)
To the surprise of absolutely noone, the House of Commons Standards committee has cleared Johnson over his lack of candour over who paid for his vacation to Mustique in December 2019 (it was eventually made clear it was David Ross, the millionaire Tory donor).

Remarkably however, the committee rejected the finding by the parliamentary commissioner for standards, that Johnson had broken the rules, arguing that it was eventually rooted out who had paid for it anyway. They even note that Johnson had previously (twice in the space of four months) been dinged for the exact same thing, but chose to merely label it "regrettable".

All via the Guardian's live politics commentary.

Edit: The parliamentary commissioner for standards report is quite damning, it's included as an appendix to the formal report clearing him:

https://committees.parliament.uk/pub...71459/default/

It is absolutely pathetic. Any fule no that even a Benefit In Kind has to be accounted for. You try telling the tax man you don't pay any tax on the swanky sports car your boss gave you as a present as 'it wasn't cash, honest, squire'.


As if Musticque Villa the company who own the holiday resort would pay for Johnson's holiday home (which it OWNS so it doesn't have to, hello?) and then Ross reimburse them by letting them use his villa. <fx Brummie accent: Yes, mate>

Captain_Swoop 8th July 2021 03:21 PM

Jacob Rees-Mogg tweeted

@Jacob_Rees_Mogg
The bands of blighters bringing illegal entrants to Blighty will be broken up by this brilliant borders bill.

Captain_Swoop 8th July 2021 03:22 PM

Under Patel's bill, people who sent money overseas to rescue Jewish children from the Nazis in the 1930s would be criminals.

dudalb 8th July 2021 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13525044)
Galloway said he would apply to have the result set aside by the courts, citing a "false statement" made about him during the campaign.

He took 21.9% of the vote!

let's face it, if false statements being made were grounds for overturning an election, just about every election in recorded history in every country would be overturned. Lying about your opponent is pretty much SOP in elections.
Galloway proves once again he is an idiot. Not that he had not proven that beyond any reasonable doubt long,long, ago.

dudalb 8th July 2021 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo (Post 13526677)

I guess you Brits had t come up with own kneeling controversy .....

Captain_Swoop 9th July 2021 02:36 AM

Priti Patel’s laws to crack down on asylum seekers crossing the Channel were dealt a blow yesterday when the Crown Prosecution Service said that it would no longer prosecute migrants.

An agreement struck between police, prosecutors, the National Crime Agency, Border Force and the Home Office over cases involving “illegal entry” will also apply to those arriving by lorry.

The CPS said that asylum seekers not involved in any criminal activity other than illegal entry should not be prosecuted because they could “usually be better dealt with by removal”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c...bill-8lggcmj5b


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.