placeholder

The party in question also noted that other people were posting hateful stuff and hadn't been arrested. What you are doing is so typical of those trying to elicit outrage. You take one incident and then claim it's typical. Got any evidence that this wasn't an unusual case? And what's really damning to the silly case you're trying to make her is that the incident you've cited took place in Hampshire. You might want to consult a map. Hampshire is not wholly or partly located inside the boundaries of London. What does this have to do with the Met police? You claim to live in the UK. Posts like your latest ones here leave that assertion open to doubt. You've got nothing.

Did the party in question make some kind of contrary-to-fact assertion for which he was arrested?

You are correct. What Trump very sensibly suggested was injecting disinfectant. That's so much better! "And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177

Any arguments that rely on contrary-to-fact assertions ought not to be taken seriously.

Irish star claims that it was a political move. A move designed to get votes or appeal to his base or both. Whatever the truth of that claim, how does it show that Irish star admits "a border wall is needed."?

Even if what you're claiming is accurate, how does that make "expat" denigratory?

Yes, Fauci postulated that the virus might have come from pangolins. And this research from 2023 shows that pangolins are still a viable candidtae A pangolin-origin SARS-CoV-2-related coronavirus: infectivity, pathogenicity, and cross-protection by preexisting immunity Virus spillover remains a major challenge to public health. A panel of SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses have been identified in pangolins, while the infectivity and pathogenicity of these pangolin-origin coronaviruses (pCoV) in humans remain largely unknown. Herein, we comprehensively characterized the infectivity and pathogenicity of a recent pCoV isolate (pCoV-GD01) in human cells and human tracheal epithelium organoids and established animal models in comparison with SARS-CoV-2. pCoV-GD01 showed similar infectivity to SARS-CoV-2 in human cells and organoids. You treat it as a fact that the furin cleave was inserted. Not necessarily... Furin cleavage sites naturally occur in coronaviruses "Here, we analyzed the sequences of coronaviruses and found furin sites occurred independently for multiple times during evolution. This exhibits natural occurrence of furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is highly possible. Thus, the insertion of furin cleavage site into SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is not necessarily a result of manual work." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873506120304165 As for gain-of-function experiments being the cause of Covid-19.. NIH DOCUMENTS PROVIDE NEW EVIDENCE U.S. FUNDED GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH IN WUHAN U.S.-funded experiment in China posed biosafety risks but did not cause Covid-19 pandemic, scientists say. "Scientists unanimously told The Intercept that the experiment, which involved infecting genetically engineered mice with “chimeric” hybrid viruses, could not have directly sparked the pandemic. None of the viruses listed in the write-ups of the experiment are related to the virus that causes Covid-19, SARS-CoV-2, closely enough to have evolved into it. Still, several scientists said the new information, which the NIH released after it was sued by The Intercept, points to biosafety concerns, highlighting a general lack of oversight for research on pathogens and raising questions about what other information has not been publicly disclosed." https://theintercept.com/2021/09/09/covid-origins-gain-of-function-research/

Just a small point. I've looked up definitions of "expat" and nowhere is it indicated that the term is even mildly offensive.

Not according to the UK government: "1. The Illegal Migration Bill will change the law so that people who come to the UK illegally will not be able to stay. Instead, they will be detained and then promptly removed, either to their home country or a safe third country like Rwanda. Crucially, the Home Secretary will be under a legal duty to make arrangements for the removal of illegal entrants falling within the scheme." https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/illegal-migration-bill-factsheets/illegal-migration-bill-overarching-factsheet Has something changed since the bill was enacted into law?

Plagiarism much? https://www.outkick.com/analysis/anthony-fauci-new-covid-book-worse-than-expected

Always useful to see the historical context: "In messages to the Hamas leadership in Doha, Sinwar compared the situation in Gaza to the Algerian War of Independence, asserting that such sacrifices are necessary. During this brutal conflict, which took place from 1954 to 1962, both sides committed atrocities, with Algerian historians citing a death toll of 1.5 million Algerians, while French historians estimate around 400,000 deaths."

Really? The quoted words of Trump below come from a memorandum released by the Trump White House. Was Adam Schiff the author of that memo? “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great,” Trump said in the July 25 call, according to the memo. “Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it, It sounds horrible to me.” Those were the only mentions of Biden in the five-page memorandum. Despite Trump’s promise to release the “fully declassified and unredacted transcript,” the memorandum notes that it is “not a verbatim transcript” of the discussion. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/25/trump-asked-ukraine-president-if-you-can-look-into-biden-and-his-son-in-phone-call.html

Are the Houthis winning in the Red Sea? There is good reason to question the sustainability of these U.S.-U.K. operations against the Houthis. “Their supply of weapons from Iran is cheap and highly sustainable, but ours is expensive and our logistics tails are long. We are playing whack-a-mole, and they are playing a long game,” the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Emily Harding recently told the Wall Street Journal. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/houthis-attacks-red-sea/

You mean when the Ukrainians were begging for weaponry to defend themselves from the Russians and their allies? The weaponry that Trump withheld despite there being a law in effect that required him to send the materiel? And that only after a threat of a lawsuit from Congress did he move to send Ukraine the weaponry? And also only after requesting that Zelensky announce that he would pursue an investigation of former V.P. Joseph Biden. Not even that Ukraine would actually investigate but only announce that it was going to.

Can you share with us the crime that was committed against them by Giuliani?

And big media was in on it. Lucky that a small Independent non-woke Media source like Reuters managed to expose it

As I noted in the government snippet I quoted, the criteria seem very elastic.

And apparently, the authorities felt this person constituted such a threat to public safety that he is no longer detained.

Such as this: encouraging terrorism, including publishing statements that encourage and glorify terrorist acts https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/396159/CT-1-M4.pdf That doesn't strike you as being somewhat elastic?

It depends on what they said. If they are advising on ways to send material support to terrorist groups that's one thing. But simply praising a terrorist group is also grounds for prosecution and imprisonment.

Actually, many years ago there was sharp worldwide spike in the price of milk due to shortages. As the shortage issue was resolved, the prices in most of the world went back down. But not in Thailand. Odd, that.

Because history definitely shows that governments don't pass laws used to stifle speech? My links are to the real world. You clearly get your information from Oppositeworld.

. Do you believe that laws are sacrosanct and their effects shouldn't be criticized?

In this case the perpetrator posed such a major threat that he was released on bail. He didn't stay rounded up for long.

So, you define mere speech as "supporting a terrorist organization"? Material support is one thing, speech quite another.