Chomper Higgot

I didn’t claim anyone was being stopped from speaking. Feel free to: 1. Quote my post(s) in which I claimed “people are being stopped from speaking”. 2. Admit you made that claim up and apologize. 3. Flush your credibility.

It’s interesting how the debate on who should be allowed to speak on University Campuses has so suddenly and diametrically flipped. Gone are the days of ‘You don’t have a right to not be offended’.

There are only 12 opinions that matter. That of the author of this opinion piece, George G. Demos is not known to be amongst them.

The people acquitted in this trial were not objecting to bogus asylum seekers being deported.

Nothing bleeding heart liberal out this Jonny. Despite the obvious warnings that he was trouble he’s been allowed to remain in the UK. He clearly had no grounds for asylum, he should have been processed and deported. Nobody objects to bogus asylum seekers being deported. A failure to manage asylum claim processing left this obviously dangerous individual in the UK. That’s the immigration issue that needs dealing with.

He wasn’t ‘imported’ he arrived without a visas, claimed asylum, a claim that was not processed. He should have been processed and deported soon after arrival. He was not, with tragic consequences. RIP his victim and condolences to his victims family. https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024-04-25/murderer-came-to-uk-to-seek-asylum-after-drifting-around-europe-for-years

To house all those disgusting people in places of power in the entertainment, financial and political system. Help me out, I’m not seeing a downside.

Interestingly, you don’t provide a link to where you got any of that.

How about a link from the UN: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148876

Not such a disgrace that she feels she should go to court to offer moral support.

Absolutely correct. I hear tell of an incident today in which a document was presented in court that had absolutely no relevance to the case being argued. If the judge is in the ball he’ll direct to jury to ignore the document and the submitting attorney’s statements relating to the document. A judge who’s on the ball can avoid opportunities for spurious claims of false evidence.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/25/israels-war-on-gaza-live-calls-grow-for-gaza-mass-graves-investigation

You’re getting better at this. Baseless assumption and whataboutary, all in one very short sentence.

How did Corbyn get into this thread? Oh you broke the glass on the emergency call point ‘If all else fails mention Corbyn’ I’m not sure he’s ever been to the U.S., much less to any of the Universities there.

They’ve got the money grab thing sorted.

Stuff you can’t deal with is trolling?

Yes you did. I also provided a link on Netanyahu’s part in funding Hamas. Any comment on that?

Any updates Brian?

No Brian. You asked a question I answered it. Now let’s see if you can follow this: EP stated he’s seen no news of a prisoner/hostage exchange. I provided a link to the latest news I had seen on the matter. Me providing that link in response to EP asking for a link is absolutely no endorsement on my part of any conditions attached to the reported exchange offer. Let me know if there is anything about that you don’t understand.

I agree with that. The ICJ have found the genocide case against Israel plausible. Do you agree? https://www.npr.org/2024/01/27/1227397107/icj-finds-genocide-case-against-israel-plausible-orders-it-to-stop-violations

Regardless. The insertion of 9/11 is a bit of whataboutary.

Brian. I’ve asked you to explain why are you surprised. It’s a statement you made. You presumably made that statement on the basis of information and or beliefs you held at the time of making the statement. So once again, why are you surprised?

But nevertheless an offer of a prisoner exchange. A link of which I provided in response to EP, refer above.

Why are you very surprised I don’t? Odd thing to say.

I have absolutely no problem with you providing a link to more recent news the matter (although that link was not specifically addressing the matter of prisoner/hostage exchange). As I said earlier: “I agree, I was just updating with a link to the more recent news I had seen.” Why you might think so would have a problem with you providing more recent news when I had already made that statement is a mystery.