James105

Don't forget the state employs millions of people. These are pretty much all Labour voters and will keep Labour on at least 20%. Unless Labour start killing public sector workers first born or something equally horrific to them such as bringing their pensions into line with the private sector then that will probably remain the same.

The Tories are not right wing. They presided over uncontrolled immigration, record taxes, record growth in the size of the state (not the economy), record funding without improvements to the NHS and adopted authoritarian measures rather than personal responsibility during covid and embraced the net zero scam. I am unable to distinguish them from the Labour party.

Leftists standing up for free speech now? Perhaps they should have thought of this when they were cheering on people losing their jobs or even jailed for "words". I feel they were warned enough times about winds changing etc.

So what? They are still people and are included in one of the 2 genders and they may be same sex attracted or otherwise so are included in gay/straight too. Anyway, I have yet to hear what rights Trans people have actually lost other than the right to bully women at sport, expose themselves and perve in women's changing rooms. What exactly has changed for trans people other than that? Men can still wear dresses, put on lipstick and pretend to be women without getting arrested as far as I know, even in Trump's America.

Being racist is already against the law, unless of course the racism is directed at white people which is not under discussion here. Is it illegal to burn books, any books? I don't agree with the premise of book burning at all but I am not actually aware of a law against it otherwise there would be many trans activists in jail right now for burning Harry Potter books. If it is not illegal to burn books then why should one work of fiction be given special treatment over other works of fiction, such as Harry Potter books?

Meaningless. The Tories (as bad as they were), were not completely clueless when it came to negotiations. This is worse than clueless as this isn't just giving them away (which would be bad enough) but to offer £18bn pounds of UK taxpayers money to do so. If you support this kind of negotiation then perhaps you have some land we can negotiate over? I'll let you hand it over to me and you will just have to pay me 10 million bahts to take it off your hands. Let me know if you are interested.

I'm now hearing that the payment offered to give away the Chagos islands has doubled to £18bn of UK taxpayers money. This is what he wants to give to Mauritius now. The only rational explanation at this point is that he is working for China. It cannot just be down to his hatred for the UK and what it (used to) stand for. I don't think there has been a more treasonous snake in charge of the UK government in history.

Not possible unless you have a definition for other religions too and then you might as well call it what it is - blasphemy. Most people have a rational fear of terrorists and of their daughters being raped or butchered by Islamists, so calling it a phobia is nonsensical. No religion should be immune from mockery or criticism. Once you remove the phobia from the word and accept we should not have blasphemy laws we are left with simple racism. We already have laws for that. No new definition required.

Labour are such short term thinkers. If they thought this through to its logical conclusion they would recognize they are being used by Islamists until they have the numbers to gain power for themselves. At that point it's goodbye UK law, hello Sharia law, and a nuclear armed Islamic state within missile range of the USA.

Don't see how Canada wins this particular battle with something like 77% of their exports going to the US. If Americans do not want to pay 25% extra and choose local products instead (where available) then Canada will be in trouble. Also, with half of their country speaking French it is inevitable at least that half will want to surrender. I'm expecting this to be the shortest trade war in trade war history.

Literally only leftists care about this. The UK is not a communist country and it never will be, which means those who work hard, are innovative, creative or simply a genius get to reap the rewards of their hard work which most have made many sacrifices to achieve. Young folks probably don't want to get raped, stabbed or mugged by the influx of cultural enrichers and if the demand for housing could somehow be reduced by not importing the equivalent of the population of Birmingham every single year, then perhaps they might stand a chance of earning better wages and buying a house. I think that is more important to them than just making a few rich people a bit less rich so the government de jour can spaff the money away on virtue signalling projects overseas.

Next time you go to A&E take a look at the ethnicity of the customers.

I've seen that movie. Think it was called Elysium. But it was just a movie. It was made before Musk bought Twitter and everyone loved him as he was making electric cars, neuro-links to help the disabled, putting satellites in space to make communication possible for everyone in the world and talking about alternative planets humans could live on. Then he bought a social media network as he believes in the concept of free speech (which everyone told him was a waste of money and would fail) and here we are. Now people who cannot abide the concept of free speech think he is a Nazi or worse, despite the worst people in the world being against free speech. Fascinating.

Is that so? I was quite surprised that they came up with something of their own but guess not. I guess the old mantra of USA innovates, China imitates and Europe (EU) regulates is still valid then.

Nope. I was using information from a supposedly reliable source to make the point that someone who sent ill-advised tweets was jailed for longer than an actual rapist based on this article: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr56g4v28g7o So is the BBC no longer a factual site in your opinion? Is it an "alternative reality"? If the BBC site is not factual what did they miss from their report? What crimes (other than tweets to encourage violence) did he commit? Did he actually commit physical violence that the BBC neglected to report on that demanded a longer sentence than a rapist for a first offense? Or was it really just the tweets?

Ah, so the BBC left out details of his actual crimes then and made it appear like he was jailed for 7.5 years for tweets? Do the BBC have an aversion to official court records? What did they miss?

Perhaps in addition to the ill advised tweets you are referring to the fact he had a copy of Mein Kampf in his house (not illegal) or he had a knife in his car, which I admit I am not sure if this is illegal but until a teleport is invented that can directly teleport knives from store to kitchen I am not sure how this is illegal either as how else do people get knives in their kitchen drawers? He certainly wasn't brandishing the knife on the street like the average cultural enricher. The "tweets" he made were actually encouraging violence, similar in nature to Ricky Jones, although undoubtedly to a smaller audience as a taxi driver rather than a Labour councillor, nor is there any evidence to suggest anyone acted upon his tweets any more than leftists threats to kill Tories or anyone else they disagree with. Hence my accurate claim that he was convicted and jailed for longer than an actual rapist for "tweets". Not sure why you keep trying to pretend that someone jailed for posting tweets is not the case. If you ignore the tweets he made, what exactly were his crimes that he was jailed for 7.5 years then and deserving of a longer sentence than a rapist for his first offense?

Less than this guy got for posting tweets* who received a 7.5 year sentence. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr56g4v28g7o It's now official. It's possible to get a longer sentence for posting ill advised tweets than actually raping someone in the UK. Starmer's Britain. What a place. Good for rapists of a certain cultural background, not so good for white people who use social media to express anger and frustration after 3 little girls were slaughtered in a dance class. * "Someone" will be along shortly to gaslight stating he wasn't jailed for posting tweets but for "pleading guilty to encouraging violent disorder". The "encouraging violence" was based on tweets he made as an armchair warrior, so yes, he is going to serve longer in jail for ill advised tweets than an actual rapist convicted of raping a woman.

So they only got one of them? What happened to the other one? Or perhaps stupid pronouns can be abandoned in articles where the perpetrator is a rapist who committed rape, which can only be a male. It's unfortunate he was "just" a voyeur and a pedophile which carries a zero jail time sentence in the UK. If only he had posted some hurty words on social media then perhaps he would have been in jail for several years and this poor girl could have avoided her fate.

Musk launches a satirical poll for amusement, but like all satire it's based on uncomfortable truths. The truth in this case is that the UK has gone downhill every single day since that moron and his clowns got into office. Which salute by the way? You mean the one where he copied Obama or Clinton? Or was it the Harris one? Difficult to tell when they all look so similar? Did he say anything when he did it to perhaps help out with the context of what he meant by it?

“Prison for Starmer,” Musk posted on his X platform earlier this month, sharing a post from an anonymous account claiming that Starmer prioritized tackling anti-Muslim abuse over condemning a child-killer. Musk followed that up with a poll asking whether America “should liberate the people of Britain from their tyrannical government.” Right, so you took that poll at face value and considered it serious enough to expect the outcome of the poll results to affect USA policy on the UK? I'm not quite sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or you simply don't understand satire and take everything everyone says literally.

Trump is more popular (or has a higher approval rating) in his second term than he was in his first, which apparently is unprecedented. If his policies work to make Americans more prosperous (which I tend to think they will) then it should be game over for the destructive wokists for another generation, which will then hopefully spread all throughout the west so Europe can get back to being Europe rather than the third world cesspit it is becoming or on the way to becoming.

Do you think that criticism of the dear leader should not be allowed? From what I have seen is that they are simply being critical which could be alleviated by Starmer not being an incompetent hypocritical moron. How are they "interfering" exactly to "remove" the dear leader? Do you have a link to support this claim?

Don't be ridiculous. Trump thinks Starmer is a clown, it's just not appropriate for him to say so out loud. It's weird how people always accuse Trump of lying until he says something they want to hear and then it is the absolute gospel truth. Fascinating. He could also just be trolling so this particular tweet from Starmer gets resurrected so Starmer looks like the hypocritical moron that he is.

Imagine a company that has operated for 119 years and survived World war 1, survived through world war 2, the winter of discontent in the 70s, the global financial crash of 2008, only to be faced with Rachel from Accounts and this joke of a government which in just 6 months of economic mis-management has forced it to shut down after all this time. Well done Labour. Absolute clown show of a government. https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/family-run-bakery-blasts-rachel-reeves-for-closing-after-119-years/ar-AA1xTuC2