johnnybangkok

I think your self-perceived 'gotcha' moment is highlighting the very point that's being debated. If your article is correct (big IF) then it's not from a person but rather a corporation which seems to be the issue as mentioned in the post above '...............................he could channel funds through one of his UK-based companies. This loophole has prompted the Electoral Commission to call for tighter regulations to ensure donations from foreign individuals or entities are restricted to money generated within the UK.' Foreign donations, whether they be an individual or a corporation have no place in UK politics.

Another good reason to not subscribe to that disgrace of a social network.

I cannot find a single thing to support this assertion so either post a link or withdraw your comment. Quire rightly, foreign citizens are barred from directly donating to political parties in the UK (and it's rigourously checked by The Electoral Commission) so unless you have some corroborated evidence (which I very much doubt), then you're just spreading conspiracy theories. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/full-guidance/political-party-donations-and-loans-great-britain

BodyDysmorphicdisorder (BDD), or body dysmorphia, is a well documented mental health condition that's been around for many, many years. The question of course is since a sex change is a permanent condition with no going back, at what age should it be allowed? In the vast majority of countries you can only get a full sex change when you are 18 and above (a sensible age when most are considered adults) but the controversy comes with puberty blockers in teenagers as young as 10 which I think most sensible people think is far too young. Places like the UK have now banned puberty blockers for under 18's but the point though is this should be medical considerations NOT a political one as extreme cases of BDD can lead to suicide. It's just not as straight forward as everyone makes out and the demonising from mostly the right isn't helping. I personally think the age should be 18 BUT with exceptions in a small amount of cases. This won't work of course because any ambiguity will just feed the haters so keep it at 18 and just keep your fingers crossed it doesn't lead to an uptick in teen deaths.

I think this is fair enough. All outgoing POTUS's are lame ducks if they don't get re-elected so Biden is just a bit more 'lame' than most. The guy's 82. He's done his bit for country over the 50 years he has been in politics so let him just fade into the night as he rightly deserves.

I rest my case

I understand the emotions involved in these matters but the death penalty isn't justice - it's revenge and retribution. No government should be carrying out revenge against their own citizens.

So many think the cost savings on 'feeding, security & medical expenses' when in reality it is exactly the opposite. 'The death penal­ty is far more expen­sive than a sys­tem uti­liz­ing life-with­out-parole sen­tences as an alter­na­tive pun­ish­ment. Some of the rea­sons for the high cost of the death penal­ty are the longer tri­als and appeals required when a person’s life is on the line, the need for more lawyers and experts on both sides of the case, and the rel­a­tive rar­i­ty of exe­cu­tions. Most cas­es in which the death penal­ty is sought do not end up with the death penal­ty being imposed. And once a death sen­tence is imposed, the most like­ly out­come of the case is that the con­vic­tion or death sen­tence will be over­turned in the courts. Most defen­dants who are sen­tenced to death essen­tial­ly end up spend­ing life in prison, but at a high­ly inflat­ed cost because the death penal­ty was involved in the process.' https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs

Yeah but it does determine what people think. Trump may have won but it was no landslide and as usual, he and the GOP benefited massively from the Electoral College. Again. An example of a landslide would have been all of you lots wet dream, Ronald Reagan. Trump won by 1.5% of the vote. Some 2 million Americans. In any other democracy it gets him a split government at best.

It’s the crowing over your own narrative that immediately paints you as MAGA. There’s no gray. There’s no middle. There’s no compromise. That’s what’s so frightening about you lot. And that’s why you get constantly compared to a cult. Everyone has failings. Everyone makes bad decisions but your lot see no fault in Trump and the continued identity politics you always play. “Your side” like it’s a football team or some other tribal following. “Your side” is your fellow Americans. People who disagree with the most egregious of what Trump says are constantly hearing that it’s going to be ok like he’s Jesus. Complete blind and utter devotion to one man rarely works out. That’s what everyone is telling you with the facts that keep getting presented to all MAGA’s but ultimately you all just follow the cult of personality and revert to sides. My side won. That’s all that matters. It’s why we think you’re blinded.

The usual MAGA response - I don't like the facts you are presenting so I will stick my fingers in my ears and loudly shout 'la, la, la,la, la' Proper schoolyard antics.

I think you are perhaps adding a few too many zero's there. 'Comer cited three “direct monthly payments to Joe Biden from Hunter Biden’s business entity” as evidence that Joe Biden profited from a deal Hunter Biden made with a Chinese energy company. But Hunter Biden’s attorney said the payments — which totaled a little over $4,000 — simply reflect Hunter Biden repaying his father, who bought him a truck while Hunter was in the throes of drug and alcohol addiction. That explanation appears to be corroborated by emails obtained from Hunter Biden’s laptop, as reported by the New York Post last year. https://www.factcheck.org/2023/12/gop-misleading-claims-in-biden-impeachment-investigation/ I will state this one last time - a GOP investigation (purposely set up to find evidence) has finally admitted there is ' still has no evidence, no crime' after literally years of trying to find some. 'Republican Rep. Don Bacon - “....at this point, there’s not a specific crime that has been committed.” https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/don-bacon-admits-no-evidence-crimes-biden-impeachment-1234997042/ But you just keep drinking the Kool Aid without putting any objective reasoning to the echo chamber you so willingly inhabit.

I'm glad you are so flippant about 'maybe a innocent is being executed, but that will be very rare.' In the US alone 'Since 1973, 200 for­mer death-row pris­on­ers have been exon­er­at­ed of all charges relat­ed to the wrong­ful con­vic­tions that had put them on death row. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence If you yourself or a member of your family was wrongfully executed, I don't think you would be quite as cavalier about this.

You keep going on about Biden yet a GOP investigation found absolutely nothing to link Joe with receiving anything from the business dealings of his son - it's a broken record you all keep insisting on playing with absolutely no evidence other than hearsay and mud-slinging. Granted his son Hunter is less 'clean' but again he has been investigated and rightly convicted for his tax evasion and false statements made when trying to obtain a gun and yes, he has been controversially pardoned by his dad but who wouldn't do that for their family if given the opportunity to do so. Comparing the Bidens to the Trumps is like comparing Ghandi to Al Capone.

You make it sound like these coca farmers are aa cute bunce of local farmers all lining up to be part of the free market - they are owned and paid for by drug cartels and if they do happen to be 'independent' do you honestly think for one moment they would be allowed to remain independent after coca production is made legal? I think you're being a bit naive if I may say so. This also applies to your other points - legalising coca leaf production then means no more smuggling or the 'numerous hands' you mention but it doesn't negate the fact they will still be buying from drug cartels who will adapt VERY quickly to the new, legal model. Heroin is an opioid and therefore in the same group as fentanyl, morphine, codeine, oxycodone and hydrocodone. However, unlike the latter which are all synthetic and produced in labs, heroin cannot be easily replicated in labs (not impossible but difficult) and if you are going to produce it synthetically you would just produce fentanyl, morphine, codeine, oxycodone and hydrocodone. Now I'm no expert but I'm guessing tht since heroin is still very much alive and kicking, it must be giving you a different high to all the other, easier to produce opiods. But yet again, I don't disagree that something has to be done other than the usual failed 'war on drugs' - I just don't think it's as easy as legalising it all. https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/06/22/legalizing-drugs-wont-stop-mexicos-brutal-cartels/

Don't you just love the mental gymnastics of the most fervant Trump fans who just can't admit their messiah can possibly have done ANYTHING wrong. Just ask yourself this; do you think he slept with Stormy Daniels (if you don't then I have a bridge to sell you), then ask yourself, when running for office and blackmailed into paying hush-money, he paid her $130,000 to avoid the obvious negative publicity of sleeping with a porn star. Then ask yourself is it reasonable that this payment was 'disguised' as reimbursements to his lawyer Cohen (who later pleaded guilty to eight federal charges of tax evasion, fraud and campaign finance violations related to the payments to Daniels and which saw him eventually jailed?) Finally, a federal judge and a grand jury then find him guilty of 34 felonies when presented with the mountain of evidence. What part of any of this doesn't sound like Trump yet here you all are talking about it being 'politically motivated' and a 'witch-hunt', just like you Beloved Leader tells you. It's ok to be a Trump fan but if that requires you to suspend all reasoning and objective analysis then I reckon that's just too high a price to pay.

I'm not disputing that it is possible for Pharma companies to produce drugs but lets take for example cocaine where it takes over ninety days, around one hectare, and one tonne of coca leaf to produce just one and a half kilograms of coca paste. Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia already have vast tracks of land soley in use for the cultivation of the coca plant (run of course by drug cartels and supported by pliant governments). The investment by Pharma companies would have to be huge but if legal (and therefore coca plant cultivation is legal), it would make more commercial sense to just buy from those organisations already producing the coca leaf. This would then basically legitimise the very cartels legalising is suppsed to stop. It's an interesting conversation and I would again reiterate something drastic needs to be done and wholeheartedly agree with initiatives such as the Zurich example you gave, but I'd also profer it's not just as straight forward as legalising these drugs and letting the free market run amok as when you are talking this amount of money, you may just end up helping and legitimising the very people you were actually trying to stop.

Another man being indignant on behalf of women. Last time I checked they had a voice so not sure they need yours. And since you are such a crusader for women I suppose you fully support their right to choose an abortion or that no always means no?

Yeah you’re a real bastion of the rights of women. And unless you can tell me exactly what sports “it is still far more prevalent “ in then all you are is a a typical sensationalist trying your best to make a mountain out of a molehill.

I’m not sure this is the big “gotcha” moment you think it is. The operative paragraph in your article states “These defeats occurred in over 400 competitions in 29 sports, though authors did not specify specific events, levels of competition or time periods.” Again I will reiterate that the MAIN sports that concern most people (athletics, swimming, gymnastics, cycling, rowing, tennis etc) are already covered but as I have also stated, there are still outlier sports (fencing obviously being one) that haven’t addressed the problem YET. So unless you can mention a particular sport or event, then my facts certainly support my narrative. And once again I’ll also CLEARLY state, I don’t think that trans women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports.

What I am agreeing to is the problem has been viewed, considered and in the vast majority of sports, sorted. Of course biological men shouldn't compete as women in women sports but you (like many on this forum) continue with your nonsense that 'the majority of champions in women's sports will be blokes in skirts' when that clearly isn't the case. You use the subject as some sort of imaginary hammer to get 'back at the wokes' when in reality it's a non-subject only now used as a dog-whistle to the likes of you. You are not winning any 'hearts and minds' because you agenda is so obvious as to be laughable.

Interesting argument and although I agree the war on drugs has been an expensive disaster and can never be won, I'm not sure any government would ever produce the drugs themselves (and therefore in effect be labled a drug dealer) and the question would still remain, who would then produce them? Any legalising would more likely legitimise drug cartels who would still have a firm control over production. This is obviously not ideal. A much better idea would be to follow the Portugese model and simply decriminalise drugs thus making the possession of drugs for personal use treated as an administrative offence, meaning it is no longer punishable by imprisonment and does not result in a criminal record and associated stigma. Drugs however are still confiscated and possession may result in administrative penalties such as fines or community service. Drug dealers still face prosecution but drug users are given more help than punishment. 'By ‘accepting the reality of drug use rather than eternally hoping that it will disappear as a result of repressive legislation’, Portuguese reform allows drugs to be treated as a health, rather than criminal justice, issue.' https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight There certainly needs to be some 'thinking outside of the box' and since the Portugese model has produced lower incarceration rates, lower overall usage and less valuable resources spent on petty drug users, I believe this could and should be a world-wide model.

Absolute nonsense. This was obviously a very disturbed young man. 'The attacker had admitted during his federal trial that he planned to hold Mrs Pelosi hostage, interrogate her on camera and "break her kneecaps" if she did not admit to what he claimed were her lies.' No mention or even a thought about being his 'gay lover'. Stop making up rubbish.

Clearly not. Paul Pelosi attacker gets life in prison without parole - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cje09qx348do

As already mentioned althletics, swimming, rugby, cricket, cycling, rowing and tennis already ban trans althletes. Which sports are you and your wife concered about?