Hamus Yaigh

It simply highlights how unhinged from acceptable discourse you are.

This isn't undermining democracy you numpty, this is democracy in action, overruling an autocratic leader surrounded by sycophants setting laws on personal whims?

I wonder how long this stays up with the race bating thread title?

Unless I missed it, you don't say who the mother is? Presumably British mother also? Therefore above answers make sense. If Thai mother I don't understand.

I read it as a snarky reply to a less than helpful first answer from @BritManToo

Duh? That seems like a pretty big downside to me.

It won't happen because right wing racist agitators are filling SM with hate speech calling for innocent foreigners to be attacked when an incident happens as skin color is established, so the police will have to deal with these scenarios on a case by case basis to maintain social order. Its not two tier police its two tier society (racists vs non racists).

Can you please explain this wealth transfer? Didn't @Digitalbanana do that in the post you questioned clearly step by step?

Perhaps re-read the op as your question is clearly answered before conspiracy theorists like yourself jump on the band wagon - again.

@simon43 ? Any feedback on this?

If the policy is "in person" as you say, why do you say mail in is allowed which clearly is not in person?

Most people besides MAGA clowns stuck inside their own personal echo chambers,

Typically clueless if he used the term Scotch.

Deflection, the first tool out the box for the conspiracy theorist without any real grasp of reality.

These Connolly tweets were made during a period of rioting? Is the context lost on these pro MAGA American free speechers? This was during a period of intense rioting in the UK following the Southport attacks on July 29, 2024, where three young girls were killed. The riots, fueled by misinformation about the suspect’s identity, involved widespread anti-immigrant violence, including attacks on mosques, police, and migrant accommodations. Her tweet, calling for mass deportations and arson against hotels housing migrants, was seen by UK authorities as inciting further violence under the Public Order Act 1986, given the already volatile situation. Some American free speech advocates, like Charlie Kirk and Michael Shellenberger, argue the 31-month sentence is excessive, emphasizing First Amendment principles that protect even offensive speech unless it directly incites imminent lawless action (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969). They may overlook or downplay the UK context—where no equivalent absolute free speech protection exists, and **public order laws prioritize preventing harm during crises**. What if difficult to understand about that?

Only a person with severe critical thinking ability would agree such nonsense. The idea that Western countries are profiting directly from the war is a conspiracy theory, that a number of members on this forum seem to excel at for some reason, money to be made out of the advertising perhaps? The West is primarily providing economic and military support to Ukraine to help it defend itself from Russian aggression.

Firstly, the idea of starting “yet another” anti-Trump thread seems to imply there’s nothing left to say on the topic. However, the discussion about Trump’s presidency, including his policies and their impact on the world stage, is still very much relevant. Dismissing criticism as simply “anti-Trump” rhetoric is overly simplistic. Secondly, it’s debatable whether Sleepy Joe’s administration wanted to continue the war. While it’s true that Biden has been a strong supporter of Ukraine, it’s difficult to suggest he actively wanted the war to continue—in fact, there’s evidence that his administration has been working to facilitate negotiations. Thirdly, calling the war in Ukraine a “proxy war” ignores the fact that Ukraine is fighting for its independence and territorial integrity. Russia has made some territorial gains, but it’s not clear they’re winning. First, Russian forces have suffered heavy losses in terms of personnel and equipment, which is not the hallmark of a successful military campaign. Your language is pretty divisive too. Dismissing people who disagree with YOU as “brainless” is both inaccurate and unproductive. It’s a common tactic used to create an “us vs. them” mentality, which is exactly what Putin wants. Putin’s goal is to present Russia as powerful, and its enemies as weak, stupid, and morally bankrupt. That’s why he’s invested so much in propaganda. The more people repeat and believe his narrative, the easier it is for him to maintain control. So when someone says “Russia is winning,” and calls everyone else brainless for questioning it, they’re doing Putin’s job for him. How much is Putin paying you if you don't mind me asking?

Isn't it your channel?

Like much of your content, bs. How does this help the op, should his 70 yo UK friend change his nationality to Chinese beforehand? #sarcasm

If you have a 63 year old on a domestic flight, is that person likely to say "Watch out for the bomb in the bag" if there really was a bomb in the bag? It is utter madness to assume he was a threat? The fact that security protocols can't distinguish between obvious non-threats and potential dangers suggests a system that has become dangerously rigid and divorced from basic human judgment. It's security theater taken to an almost comical extreme - if the consequences weren't so serious for the poor passengers caught up in it.

.delete. Wrong topic.

‪Steven Beschloss‬ “This thin-skinned tyrant is determined to strip the White House of actual reporters & threaten media companies if they dare to question him. It’s an appalling sign every reporter in the Oval Office didn’t speak up or get up and leave in support of NBC’s Alexander.”

So you are concerned the LGBTQ+ will be shipping the rest of us off to internment camps and gas chambers? Have you looked at yourself in the mirror?

Hersov’s critique is flawed due to its inflammatory tone, lack of evidence, reliance on discredited claims, omission of broader crime context, and potential bias stemming from his own ideological stance. The BBC article covered a 2020 protest in South Africa following the murder of farmers Glen and Vida Rafferty, where crosses were placed along a highway as a memorial, not graves. Donald Trump misrepresented this footage in a May 2025 Oval Office meeting with Cyril Ramaphosa, claiming it showed "burial sites" of over 1,000 white farmers, fueling a discredited "white genocide" narrative. The BBC article clarified that the crosses were symbolic, not graves, and quoted a local farmer, Rob Hoatson, confirming it was a temporary memorial. The narrative of mass graves and genocide was debunked, as South African police data shows only 44 farm-related murders in 2024, with no evidence of racial targeting.

You shouldn't, they just laugh in disbelief at you.