James105

He was quite funny in his prime. I was in the forces and he was one of the few (possibly only) comedians that would regularly tour overseas bases to support the troops on operations, put on a show and I don't think he made any money from doing these. I met him once on a deployment and he seemed quite a decent bloke. He is just a guy that told jokes with the purpose of trying to make people laugh, and those jokes were of their time before people became so pathetically weak and sensitive to well, just about everything really.

What every species does to ensure it's existence endures. Procreate and evolve. Maybe we'll get lucky and it will keep us around as batteries to power its energy requirements until it perfects the usage of drawing power from the sun.

Bit weird living in a country that has cannabis shops that can legally sell mind altering drugs yet are not allowed to sell harmless (at least in comparison to weed and cigarettes) vapes. Luckily for him he wasn't able to purchase the illegal vape (which could land him in jail for 21 days if caught), and merely having a punch up and lobbing a brick through a window will probably result in far less of a punishment.

Ok I am curious. Who do you think is a funny left wing comedian? Frankie Boyle who made fun of Katie Price's disabled son? Jo Brand who thought it would be funny if someone threw acid in a politicians face? Which right wing comedy shows have you watched recently to form the opinion that "rightwing humour is dominated by the reactionary stuff nobody wants to listen to"?

I would suggest Have I got news for you is different as it offers politically biased views on a channel that pretends it is impartial so I would not object to someone complaining about something that a) they are forced to pay for and b) is breaking their impartiality charter with impunity. Sky News as an equivalent example is as left wing biased as they come (hence they are going bankrupt and confirming the saying 'go woke go broke') but they are a private channel (same as GB news) so they can do what they want. If you have an equivalence with Sky News or another private channel where you can show that 70,000 right wing folks signed a petition to get it cancelled then you would have a point. My feeling is that right wing folks have better things to do than watch TV shows they know that they are not going to like for the sole purpose of policing with the goal of preventing others from watching it.

I never said it was. I was responding to someone who said "It seems a the show’s audience didn’t find it funny." which I found strange because why would someone watch a show that they didn't find funny? No-one is forced Clockwork Orange style to have their eyelids pinned open to suffer through something they don't like (I assume people own TVs like the one I have that offer other channels) and apparently 70,000 signed a petition to try to get a show cancelled as someone said something as a joke they didn't find funny. This seems to be quite an odd behaviour of leftists that they feel the need to police shows that they don't even watch. Very odd.

You do? What are you thinking? Another Ukranian rent boy getting up to mischief?

I doubt any of the signers of that petition have ever seen the show so they are not "the audience". Do you watch things you don't like on a regular basis so that you can complain and sign petitions about it? Is that common behaviour amongst leftists to purposely watch things not aimed at them so they can get mad and complain about it? I can understand if it is the BBC that they are forced to pay for but a privately funded channel seems a bit odd.

I'm curious to see his mugshot as from the videos (although not great quality) I've seen of the driver of the car he looks to be in his early 30s which considering he is an alleged drug taker would be quite surprising as taking drugs normally ages a person, not de-ages them. There was a man arrested who looks to be 53 who was part of the lynch mob trying to grab the driver when the police were detaining the actual driver and I assumed the police were talking about him rather than the driver, but now it seems the person who was driving is apparently 53... Something strange is going on here. Not convinced we are not being gaslit about something about this character, but no idea what as in the videos he for sure looks to be a white guy. At the very least I'd like to know what drugs he is taking as whatever he is taking he looks way younger than 53.

This is the most strawiest of straw men I think I have seen so far. Nobody is "desperate" for this to be a muslim and you are the first I've seen that seems to link the 2. Why do you think you did that do you think? Is there some kind of pattern or history of muslims ploughing vehicles into pedestrians with the purpose of killing and maiming them? If there was such a pattern of this kind of violence its no surprise that you are linking a car driving into pedestrians with muslims, but I wouldn't necessarily call you a racist for doing so, just someone who is able to identify a pattern of behaviour amongst a certain culture.

Best case scenario is that AI is benign and does all the jobs that humans hate, then does all the jobs that humans like, and then humans have no way to live a productive life so society and birth rates collapse. Worst case scenario is that AI is malevolent and destroys us all.

Utter embarrassment to the UK. The incompetent fool is getting desperate now and turning to countries even more corrupt than Rwanda to help him out of the hole he has dug for himself.

What hard evidence do you have that 18,000 gods (that humans have believed in throughout history) do not exist?

Isn't that your problem as well though? You only believe in just one more god than me and just like myself you don't believe in the other 17,999 invented by humans despite having no evidence that those other 17,999 gods do not exist. I'm sure you would agree that it would be silly to believe that Thor or Zeus or Odin is real.. right?

Thousands of gods have been invented by humans, some estimates have put it at around 18,000. If you think believing in a god ensures where you go in the afterlife then what makes you think you have the right god? Aren't you concerned that you rock up in the afterlife and Odin (for example) kicks you into Hel and an eternity of suffering for not believing in him, since you think that "belief" ensures where you go? I think having a belief would stress me out that I had it wrong considering there is literally zero evidence to go on. Not sure how religious folks sleep at night with the worry really.

I grew out of religion when I discovered that Santa Claus was a lie told to children to make them behave under threat of Santa not delivering presents to naughty children, and religion was just the same kind of ruse to convince people that if they didn't behave in a certain way they would suffer in the afterlife. It was a useful tool prior to civilization and laws so I can understand why the intelligent folks of the time used it to control their illiterate and uncivilized populations in much the same way my parents used Santa Claus on me. I am not surprised stupid people believe in religion as you can convince stupid people of just about anything, but I am somewhat bemused why the otherwise intelligent people I know still believe in this stuff.

There is no more "hard evidence" that there is no Santa Claus/Tooth Fairy/Unicorns, than there is that there is Santa Claus/Tooth Fairy/Unicorns.

Most movies rely on computer generated locations and effects anyway. This will just take away the burden of employing a pampered celebrity to do their thing in front of a green background and spending vast sums of money on humans creating the CGI. Won't be long now before these tools are being fed scripts and will be creating entire movies and tv shows, and then not long after that they will be writing the scripts themselves based on a loose idea and a few prompts. This technology is accelerating insanely fast.

What would you call this journalist reporting on the self proclaimed "Muslim Defence League" then? Is he a "gammon" in your opinion?

They called for people to murder MPs didn't they but I don't see them getting charged for that so yes, it is 2 tier. Also they haven't been sentenced yet so even in the unlikely event it goes to court I expect no more than a soft telling off and zero jail time. In order to be charged with a speech offense it has to meet the following criteria: 1. White person said something 2. Against a (perceived) non-white person/group 3. Who is not a leftist. Perhaps you can debunk this by providing a similar example to Lucy Connolly who did not meet that criteria as there are plenty of black activists & islamists & trans folk out there who have demanded the killing of white people or MPs or even JK Rowling and not a peep has been heard from CPS. Here are some examples I have to hand:

Sure, it needs someone in power to do this so you just need to get the moronic PM to agree to losing 170 MPs and increasing the Reform MP count to 100 and the Tories count to 139 (which would give Reform + Conservative the most seats). Or would you prefer to hold off on this until a party you don't like gets into power?

No government has been given a majority with so little votes. Labour had more votes under Jeremy Corbyn in 2019 when the population was at least 3 million less. Just 20% of the electorate voted for Labour. Starmer is making hare-brained decisions on a daily basis with no manifesto mandate. His latest indefensible calamity: Oh, and the small print means he has weakened security as should we be in a conflict with an ally of China, he has agreed to "expeditiously inform them" of this. Never has the UK had a PM who so clearly hates the UK.

The truth is inconvenient you mean. I don't think you understand how dangerous it is to continuously lock people up for saying things that the state doesn't like relying on a corrupt judiciary to help them do so. History is littered with fascist states doing exactly this and sadly it is also filled with useful idiots cheering from the sidelines when it happens to someone they don't like. I doubt historically those useful idiots were cheering in the end. The next thing he is being charged with is for allegedly doxxing 2 journalists in response to them doxxing him. It's beyond ridiculous now. He needs to claim asylum in the USA as it is abundantly clear he is being persecuted for having political views the state does not like. It's shameful what the UK has become and the UK is no longer in a position to criticize other fascistic states when they persecute their own citizens.

No, she did not. Posting that "people can set fire to the hotels for all I care" is not a direct call to violence, it is merely indifference to it. Here is an example of someone posting actual incitement to violence. How long do you think he should be locked up for?

Sounds similar to Lucy Connolly who put out an offensive tweet in the heat of the moment and then deleted it of her on volition within 3.5 hours and then made an immediate, genuine and honest apology. She is incarcerated for 31 months.