James105

My mistake, I wrongly presumed you would know what hearsay was. I forget that English is not your first language so not your fault. Let me give you the definition: "information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor" The "letter" you refer to was a second hand account of an alleged event. Hence the term hearsay. This completes your English lesson for today. You are welcome.

Is there really so little evidence that Farage is a racist or fascist that you need to go back to 1981 to provide hearsay to confirm this? We have evidence that David Lammy is a thick and we only need to go back one day. This is the same guy who called the Vatican racist for using white smoke to signal a new pope has been selected. I'd sit this one out if I was you.

Well in that case then there will be hardly anyone for Farage to deport will there? So on that basis, why complain about it? Or do you have no confidence in your own statement and recognize it for the lie that it is?

My sinister prediction. They will make it a requirement to have this to be able to vote. They will force people to choose between going along with this nasty authoritarian measure or lose their ability to vote Labour out of government.

You can scream into the void with your caps lock "racist" slurs all you want. I think it makes you sound like a child having a little temper tantrum but you do you. Labour are categorically failing on every single metric. Why are you supporting failure? I have zero doubt you are one of those that insisted on the government de jour borrowing more and more money as the Bank of England can just print money etc but now seem to have learnt there are consequences to all this borrowing. The key to getting out of this mess is spending less and growing the economy. Labour are demonstrating right now, in real time, that they are incapable of doing either of those things. The Tories demonstrated the same before Labour. Yet here you are demanding more of the same failed economic policies and calling people racist who do not want more of the same repeated failures. Those you label as racist (which I presume in your little head means literally anyone who disagrees with you) demand something different. The only different option on the table is Reform just now. Farage by the way has never had the chance to govern this country so this would be his first chance. Perhaps you should educate yourself before claiming others should do so.

Nobody would have an issue with a voluntary system to make it easier for people to identify who they are if they are willing to let a bunch of incompetent clowns handle all their data. Those who don't want or need it can continue to use their driving license or passport etc. The problem is that we all saw recently just how authoritarian a government could be when they have full control over peoples actions and they would use power for powers sake, telling people to walk a certain path round a supermarket, or stand on a particular spot in the queue, or tell people that they cannot go to the pub unless they buy a scotch egg at the same time and get people to grass on each other. And that was the conservative party. These morons wanted harder, more intrusive rules, more spending, more government interference imposed. I also remember someone in particular complaining about forcing ID upon people.

Ergo, it will also be possible to work illegally even if one is in possession of a digital ID. There is already a law in place to fine companies £20,000 for each illegal employee infraction. They could very easily enforce this using the existing NI number system. The police could just sit at their desks as they do now when trawling through social media posts looking for hurty words, order some donuts via Deliveroo or Uber and catch the illegal immigrant that is delivering the donuts. Then the illegal immigrant can be deported saving the taxpayer tens of thousands of pounds, and Deliveroo can be fined £20,000 each time. Next thing you know, Deliveroo stop employing illegal workers and it acts as a deterrent for other illegal worker employers. No digital id required. Simple and it won't cost tens of billions of pounds.

It's actually so stupid its mildly amusing. Suppose for a moment that those that strongly object to it (30%) do not get it. What then? Labour (not surprisingly) have no answer to this other than that they will not be fined, and to take Starmer at his word (lol) would mean those people would no longer earn an income, which means they cannot contribute tax, which means they have to get welfare (which is allowed without digital id), which would cripple the economy. Then you have the useful idiots who support this whilst at the same time saying that Farage is a fascist nazi etc. These numbskulls are also quite amusing as their short term little brains cannot see far enough ahead to see that if Farage gets in power then he would inherit a UK that has mandatory digital ID which would be a fascist dictators wet dream. Which makes their fascist arguments completely disingenuous or they are as stupid as they appear to be. So yeah, quite amusing. It will not get through parliament, it will not get through the lords, and it doesn't look like its enough to distract from his illegal election contributions so he has made himself (again) look like a prize authoritarian idiot for nothing.

It's objectively true that anyone who voted for Labour voted to be poorer and are getting poorer. The upcoming budget will make people poorer still as Labour are a bunch of wastrels that have no idea how to control spending so will need to raise taxes again. Farage is an unknown to some extent as he has never been in government, but to vote for the same 2 parties that got the UK into the mess it is in now would be an act of self harm and seeing your comments leave me in no doubt the thickest people in the UK will do so again. Farage is offering to reduce taxes, abandon the net zero scam, prevent foreigners from leaching off the welfare state and tackle illegal immigration. Policies that (if enacted) will grow the economy (as reducing taxes always does), cut wasteful spending and not implement authoritarian measures such as mandatory digital ID which will waste countless more billions and do nothing. Seems to me that the choice is vote for one of the legacy parties who have a proven track record of waste, incompetence, corruption and making things worse or someone new. No amount of doom mongering will change that when your heroes are doing such a terrible job. I hope for your sake mandatory digital ID doesn't make it over the line as I imagine you would not want someone like Farage having such control over your life if he is as bad as you make him out to be. "I showed some guys charts after Brexit". Whilst I don't want to comment on the sad state of this obsession in your life that has led you to showing people charts in bars, I suspect you neglected to also show them the USD-THB chart that followed pretty much the same trajectory as the £ over the same time period.

Another one who has never actually listened to anything Charlie Kirk actually said, but has to be told what to think about him from out of context quotes provided by leftist media who also probably never listened to him speak, but got their out of context quotes from someone higher up in the leftist narrative food chain. You might as well be an NPC if you don't have any opinions of your own, and just offer the same regurgitated tosh copied and pasted from your leftist media sources. Isn't it tiring to be so hateful? Let the guy rest in peace.

Correct, he was not in government pre or post Brexit so he couldn't have any part in it's implementation could he now? Did you actually think he was in government or something?

The economy is tanking. The pound will most likely tank. This is happening during the current shambolic government and is an acceleration of the decline started under the last shambolic government. Why on earth you think people should vote for more of the same is an absolute mystery to me. Farage has never been in government so no point in trying to gaslight people into believing he is directly responsible, as no-one other than the really stupid will believe you.

You are starting to get it now. I chose to come to Thailand. I could also have chose not to. Well done. Give your self a little pat on the head.

Nobody would have an issue if people could choose to have a digital ID, the issue is that it is mandatory. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? The reason you don't know what it is or what it is to be used for is that it wasn't in the Labour manifesto and has no mandate. Not even the 20% of the electorate who did vote Labour voted for this. The "racists" might point out that everyone who is entitled to work in the UK already has a national insurance number and the home office could quite easily confirm who is and is not allowed to work. Even the incompetent police could order their donuts via Uber or Deliveroo and catch the illegal workers who are delivering said donuts whilst they are looking for mean comments on social media.

The key word in all of this is choice. Yes, we do choose to give our info to Apple etc for convenience but we can also choose not to, and there are no societal consequences to not doing so. The key word in this proposal is mandatory. I think even a small child could tell the difference between the two. No surprise that the curtain twitchers who loved the covid times, forcing others to wear face masks, grassed up their neighbors and cheered on vaccine passports are the cheerleaders for this proposal.

Most Londoners were priced out of London a long time ago, hence the majority who live there are foreign born, who also occupy 48% of the social housing stock. You think the racist & christianaphobic mayor would have had a chance of being elected in 2000 London? Not a chance. London is the canary in the coal mine of where the rest of the UK is heading unless radical change is implemented with the next government.

All these recent converts to supporting freedom of speech following Kimmels suspension must be very pleased about this. I'm looking forward to seeing them criticize Biden in the same way they have Trump to demonstrate they are not the hypocrites they appear to be.

The same as Kimmel. Unless of course you can provide a source that backs up your claim with an official request to get him fired and is not just conjecture or hearsay. You cannot seriously expect anyone to believe anything that comes out of a leftists mouth after objectively lying about so many things for so long. The level of proof required now for me to believe anything you or other leftists say needs to be on the level that would be accepted by a court of law.

Well, Charlie Kirk has been described as a conservative/rightist/far-right on here and his entire life was spent engaged in civilized debate with people who disagreed with him, so yes I do. I couldn't find any evidence of a "rightist" celebrating the actual assassination of a prominent left wing figure or attempting to justify it based on an out of context quote they might have said. If you could provide evidence of such I'd be happy to create a new box for you.

This assassination has certainly been revealing. You can literally put people into boxes on this based on their statements. Antifa/far left/woke left: Charlie Kirk deserved to be killed. Celebrates his murder. Leftist: Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to be killed, but <insert out of context leftist media sourced quote here> to justify why it's okay he was murdered. Have never watched his content and rely on leftist media to be told what opinion they should have of him. Liberal: Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to be killed. Conservative: Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to be killed. Liberals and conservatives can disagree on just about everything and are capable of civilized debate, but the other 2 groups are incapable of reasonable debate and are an unhinged lost cause who will continue to call people nazi's and fascists despite not really understanding what Nazi's and fascists are or did, and despite the evidence that calling people these names will put a target on the backs of people that they label that other unhinged leftists will use as justification of murdering people to cancel them permanently.

Ok you have got me cornered here so I am just going to have to come out and say it. Yes I do tend to consider that the assassination of a young father of 2 for his opinions a lot more serious then a talk show host losing his job for his opinions. I presume that murdering someone for their opinions is okay with you but you draw the line on someone losing their job for them?

Why do you need to keep lying about what I said? Is it a pathological problem that you have do you think? Maybe you should see a doctor. I'll repeat what I said below... I have never said that I believed the first amendment should be overturned and I would passionately defend your right to tell lies, be abhorrent, and spout all the nonsense the left typically spouts without facing arrest or persecution from the state for doing so. If I was your employer though, I would probably fire you for your abhorrent views as I wouldn't want someone with those views representing my company unless you had a position as a cleaner or something else not public facing.

I have seen no official legal statements from the US government that said ABC had to fire Kimmel. The left have an unbelievable amount of form for lying so unless I see official FCC statement or legal position then why should I believe it? Because you said so? ABC made a decision that they considered best for their business and if they really wanted to keep him in his job then they could have fought for him as there was no legal requirement to fire him. They didn't do that though, did they? Provide a link that isn't hearsay and maybe I'll take it seriously, otherwise the fact of the matter is that its just conjecture and since ABC didn't kick up a fuss my presumption is that they wanted him gone anyway, and this or any other excuse would have done it.

As per usual the left needs to resort to lies as they don't have an argument. I have never said that I believed the first amendment should be overturned and I would passionately defend your right to tell lies, be abhorrent, and spout all the nonsense the left typically spouts without facing arrest or persecution from the state for doing so. If I was your employer though, I would probably fire you for your abhorrent views as I wouldn't want someone with those views representing my company unless you had a position as a cleaner or something else not public facing. Does that help clarify my position on free speech? By the way, I don't agree with Charlie Kirk on abortion or gun rights, I actually think the UK has this about correct in both cases. That said, if the UK continues to put the safety of UK citizens (particularly women) at risk from the cultural enricher small boat invasion I am prepared to change my mind on the right to own and carry a gun for defense.

Oh, so if they weren't there (it's the BBC who said they were who have been an untrustworthy news organization for a while now) I guess that makes it okay then? Does that make it any easier for his widow to tell their 3 year old kid their daddy is never going to come home? Perhaps you will follow this up by saying that 3 year olds are very adaptable and will soon get used to growing up without a father to make the assassination of people the left want to silence more justifiable in your head.