James105

I must have missed the part where they rocked up in armoured tanks along with the threat of nuclear destruction that would be required to effectively overthrow the government in the USA. What were they armed with... a spear??! You have all drunk way too much cool-aid from the teats of CNN, MSNBC etc and seem to lack any critical thinking or observational skills of your own if that is really what you think when looking at these pictures. It was a protest that crossed the line to include trespass and the sentences should really have reflected that. The minute you think what you saw there was an "insurrection" is the point you should look long and hard in the mirror at what CNN et all have turned you into.

Only over here is it so difficult. In the UK with Apple pay or whatever there is not a chance someone using cash will be faster than someone using their phone to pay as it literally is just a tap that is needed - it's people who use cash who are now the ones holding up queues as they fish it out of their pockets and then wait for change. The problem here is that every shop does something different, they don't want to pay the fees for Visa/Mastercard transactions or even debit card transactions so there is a mess of scanning QR codes to directly transfer from banking app or using one of several different apps to pay. I prefer cashless (typically) as everything time I buy something from 7/11 it always ends up being something like 21/41/61/81 bahts so I end up with useless annoying small coins rattling around in my pockets.

Sure I do, the BLM riots were violent and destructive. Whatever passes for "insurrection" nowadays looked like a nerds costume party. Insurrection: BLM riot

They should face the same level of justice that BLM rioters received. Nothing more, nothing less.

It would depend how they got to the uk. If they entered the UK by legal means then yes I would. If they arrived illegally then would not as I do not support the rights of criminals to gain entry into the UK over those who try and enter by legal means and would want them deported straight back to Uganda. If they are in Uganda I would suggest they seek refuge in the nearest country that is safe for them, which would be one of the several countries bordering Uganda. So in your view why would they not want to seek refuge in a nearby country then? What has the US/UK got to do with any of this? The only contribution to this the UK or USA needs to make is to immediately stop any foreign aid from reaching Uganda until such time as they repeal this and similar laws.

Uganda borders Rwanda, as well as many other countries. Why would they need to go all the way to the US or UK for refuge? Would it be because you think that that African countries are inferior in some way?

How exactly does this situation improve when Labour gets in though? Are they going to stop appeasing and bending the knee to the hate mobs like this and BLM etc when they get in? I have not seen any evidence of this and my current assumption is that as bad as things are now, it will get significantly worse under Labour. Perhaps you have some insight I am unaware of you can share?

Ok, well thats good as I remitted enough cash for about 2 years into my Thai bank account over here in December. If I was to (hypothetically) spend 6 months or so out of Thailand and make myself a non tax resident in Thailand next year or the year after and take the opportunity to replenish my Thai bank account whilst a non tax resident would that be legal tax avoidance or illegal tax evasion?

You seem to have forgotten to include the context surrounding this sentence so to help you out here is the link: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-65263650 The context is: - They climbed and suspended themselves from the QEII bridge for about 37 hours - The bridge had to be closed for 41 hours, delaying almost 565,000 drivers - Small businesses lost up to £170,000 in earnings - Caused delays to people who needed urgent medical care So they didn't just unfurl a banner over a bridge, their actions directly impacted thousands of people. If they want to show a banner in a peaceful protest on a street they can do this. Their sentencing represents a deterrent so that other idiots of "no fixed address" think again when they have a desire to hold up their "end of the world is nigh" signs in places that are a danger to themselves and others, and is neither authoritarian or draconian unlike the original topic this thread relates to.

No, she is not. She uttered the lie that "trans women ARE women". For that statement alone she should be nowhere near the conservative party and should join one of the other parties that pretend they believe that lie.

Kids born today will be living in a majority muslim world by the time they are 50. That'll be fun for them. I doubt there will be so many men trying to claim to be women in that kind of world as women's and LGBT rights plunge ever further into the abyss.

Of course, it would never occur to the pearl clutchers that this could be the very reason for displaying the Thai flag, as Isreali soldiers would be only too aware that the evil murdering rapists on the other side of this conflict are holding Thai people hostage as well as Isreali's.

It's 72 virgins. Family guy did a thing about it...

So if they win then they could reduce the number of legacy women and replace them with "modern women" for "balance"? This feels like a potential win for the Patriarchy.

It would be better for all involved I think if on the bus you could just wear a face mask to protect you from "man made global warming" as that way the person you chose to sit next to on the bus would know exactly what your opinions are on Climate change, Palestine, Covid, LBGTQ+2LSA, illegal immigration, pronouns, Trump, the Tories etc and would be able to make an informed decision to move elsewhere (or pretend someone else is sitting there) before you got a chance to. That way this person would be safe from being infected by leftist woke nonsense.

This is the reason you cannot do it online. The clock resets and your 90 day report is now due 90 days after you returned, but everything resets so that means that the first 90 day report has to be done in immigration and then the ones after that can be done online again.

It does seem a bit easy to knock out and cause an entire bridge to collapse. It's going to give all the wrong people ideas for their next terrorist attack as it is a lot easier to commandeer a large boat and steer it into a bridge leg(?) at rush hour than attempt to take over a plane to crash into a building.

Clearly you didn't read the article, as excess deaths are not counted differently. The article states that with the covid death count there were many different ways of counting this. In Norway a covid death was only counted as a covid death if the consulting physician said it was the cause of death, whereas Sweden counted it as a covid death if they had tested positive for covid at some point but died of something unrelated such as a heart attack. The way every country counts a death is the same. Are they alive or not. If not then it is counted as a death.

Another one that seems to think that the only thing that killed people during covid was covid. The excess deaths are the only reliable figure to use here as some countries counted a death as a covid death if within 30 days of a positive test and some didn't. But a death is always counted as a death whatever the reason so if you look at excess deaths from all causes then Sweden looks quite good, and importantly they didn't destroy their economy or wreck their kids education either. I know these cold hard facts can be difficult to take if you have been heavily invested in the lie that lockdowns saved lives, but they are what they are. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/sweden-during-pandemic#excess-deaths

Sure, if the only thing people died of was covid then preventing covid deaths would be a good thing. Unfortunately during this period the things that kill people in much greater numbers did not go away and were probably exasperated due to lockdowns (people not being screened for cancer/heart conditions whilst still treatable etc). Also different countries counted covid deaths differently so is not a reliable number for comparison. What is a reliable number though is excess deaths from any cause. So my point stands, that Sweden without a lockdown had lower excess deaths than countries that applied lockdowns, so it could easily be argued that lockdowns caused worse outcomes than not locking down. I know the data does not suit the narrative that 'lockdowns saved lives' (sorry about that), and this is the point I was making earlier. Even with cold hard facts presented to those who thought lockdowns were a good idea that demonstrates they were palpably not a good idea, people (such as yourself) would willingly accept lockdowns even with knowing this fact.

Yes, I stand corrected. Sweden without a lockdown had lower excess deaths than countries that applied lockdowns, so it could easily be argued that lockdowns caused worse outcomes than not locking down. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/sweden-during-pandemic#excess-deaths

I admire your optimism but I think "the people" will willingly accept it all over again. Even if you could inject hindsight directly into the 70-80% of people who craved lockdowns and literally show them how much economic damage it caused for no difference in outcomes they would do the same thing all over again, and probably demand longer and harder lockdowns as the previous ones were ineffective. Propaganda is a powerful tool and far too many people are susceptible to it. Governments have experience of using this tool now and will use it even more effectively next time as covid was a wonderful and profitable time for the richest and most powerful on the planet, and there is just no way they will let the next one go to waste.

Are you equally racist to non-white people living in the UK based on their ancestors migrating there and have now made it their home? Do you tell them to "go back home" as well?

If the content posted is not illegal then why would you object to that? Do you want censorship? Did you read 1984 and think how amazing it would be to live in that kind of world?

Did you see the photo of the "transgender woman"? It's literally a bloke having a shave. He is just your everyday perv that has been given permission to legally perv on women and if anyone complains he holds up the transgender card and the actual women get punished for being transphobic.