MicroB

It stopped in 1868, following decades of public process. One of my hobbies is geneology. Often the research can lead you down false warren holes, but you learn a lot. I thought one of my ancestors had been transported. When looking at this person, I discovered a lot about the whole process. It might take years to be actually transported. You were taken to some prison ship, maybe at Portsmouth. And there you remained until the ship was filled. For this particular person, that meant 3 years aboard what I can imagine to be a stinking place. I was shocked, but I suppose it was obvious.

Many were also sent to North America to work the tobacco plantations.

No one seems to have read the report. Its one of a number of options being explored. It doesn't mean this is what is going to be done. Prisons could be built, but they take a long time to build. Assuming you will get the private sector to build them, rather than a mythical workforce of State Brickies, there is a long lead time isn: 1. Identifying sites; locals will need to be consulted, environmental risk assessments, security risk assessments. 2. Identify funding; the Home Office will need to fund the construction and manning of prisons, but do they do this within their existing budget, which means other programmes will have to be cut, or are they going to get an increase from the Treasury. Different rules apply to whether its a Capital project (building a prison) versus paying for a service. 3. Issuing calls for tender. There is a UK Procurement Act 2023 that repeals 350 EU Directive related requirements. Drawing up the requirements takes time. When we say a large prison, how large? What category of prisoners? How many screws? Scrutinizing submissions takes time, unless you want another COVID19 contracting debacle, with people like James Dyson or Richard Branson suddenly getting into the Justice Game. Takes years, from issuing the tenders, design/surveys, construction, acceptance, likely 5-10 years 4. Manning the Prisons. There is a shortage of Prison Officers going back at least 10 years. This is curious, as there should be the biggest pool of potential recruits for many a year. Traditionally, the police, fire service, prison service can rely on a pool of ex-services people, and in recent years, there should have been a pretty big pool of very experienced people available.. Even so, you don't take a guy off the street, stick him/her in a uniform, and send them into a prison riot. 4 out of 5 prisons have insufficience riot-trained officers. As for emptying prisons of foreigners, there are two approaches; 1. Secure the agreement of the receiving country; what they do with them, we don't care. Well we might if those convicts are people who are considered a threat to the UK 2. Don't secure an agreement. Just give them a one way ticket. Receiving countries might start to refuse flights from the UK, because we keep shoving thieves and murderers on the Ryan Air flights. A knock on of this is any foreigner wanting to go home for free just has to knock a grannie down in the street, thereby increasing the crime rate, because for foreigners, there is now no downside in committing crime. Realistically, the government needs to look at renting temporary accomodation, ie the oil industry crew barges that have previously been used for prison accomodation. These are readily available. eg the Safe Esperia was a floating accommodation barge for the offshore oil and gas industry. There was a whole fleet of them. Bibby Line brought it, renamed it Bibby Resolution. It was then chartered to the MOD to serve as floating troop accomodation in the Falklands. In 1988, it, and a sister ship, were sold to the New York Department of Corrections, as a temporary prison ship. It was closed in 1992, then sold off in 1994. In 1997, the Resolution was now HMP Weare in the UK, a temporary prison ship. It ran until 2006; turned out it was really expensive to run as a prison. Currently its in Nigeria, where it was towed to originally to serve as probably pretty grim oil industry crew accomodation. If you include people with one or both parents born in Ireland or Northern Ireland, then over 10% of the population is likely dual national, and thus cannot be rendered stateless by removal of British citizenship. This likely reflects in the prison population, ie about 10,000 people. If removal of foreign criminals is considered as a viable option, then this could also be considered. Its pretty dystopian though.

https://accountable.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Project-2025-Anti-LGBTQ-Policies-One-Pager.pdf https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf Now those are positions you might wholeheartedly support. But they are radical positions, making you a radical. Literally, the definition of a radical is a person who advocates thorough or complete political or social change, or a member of a political party or section of a party pursuing such aims. All of those policies that you are referring to will result in great social change, which you think are for the better, but are, by definition, radical For instance, supporting those invoking the 1st Amendment as a means to discriminate against some customer, is a pretty radical view. Because the US follows Common Law, using the 1st Amendment as a means to justify some business owners to refuse to serve some customers, because of, essentially lifestyle, might justify someone refusing to serve black people "because they like black music", or women "because women should in the home" etc, or men with asian wives/girlfriends "because I don't believe in mixing of the races". Its an unwinding of the social contract that has been well established for 30-40 years, and hence a radical change.

Its worse than that; After all that, what kind of father then buys his kid a rifle 6 months after that son was investigated for issuing death threats. I suspect is the sort of father who probably thumbs a nose at authority, and feeds his kid BS about a school shooting that occurred when his sone was 2. In May 2023, when confronted with the allegations against his sone, Gray responded That is not a normal reaction. He referred in the same interview to taking the then 13 year old to shoot his first deer. There are photos emerging of the boy, AR-15 in hand, posing by the deer carcass, with his face smeared with blood. Yes, I some of the hunting fraternity consider this a time honoured tradition. But this is is the context of a dead beat dad and and a son who went of the rampage. I'm of a mind that the father should be facing a capital charge. I suspect the father more than made a mistake in not spotting signs. I suspect it will come out that he radicalised his son.

Probably a good idea not to try and hijack a thread again with your own prejudices then.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/05/02/hundreds-of-russian-troops-gathered-out-in-the-open-they-didnt-know-the-ukrainians-had-aimed-four-atacms-rockets-at-them/ I think the major difference is the Ukraine will take an honest look at intelligence failures and OpSec. In Russia, there is blame and people tossed out of windows, whether or not it was their fault. You have to remember, the whole of Ukraine is within range of Russian cruelty and barbarism.

If you look at China's money/investment, its more akin to a loan shark, eg Sri Lanka, Tanzania. Loan sharks often portray themselves as a salt of the earth pillar of the community, providing a necessary service, but its always with dark strongs attached,

But your point is fallacious. Vietnam was a divided country, unless you are arguing that Russia has legitimate sovereignty over Ukraine. The Paris Peace Accords was not about America making peace with North Vietnam. It was about the political future of South Vietnam, and how the North and South would reconcile to create a single unitary state. South Vietnam had no future. As a result of the talks, the US would offer reconstruction aid to all of Vietnam. You make claims what the US will do, while deliberately ignoring several examples. Western Europe; war ravaged, the US piled in aid, to friend and former foe alike. Similarly Japan. Is the US particularly unreliable as an ally? No more than most other states, and a much better ally than many states. The first quote attributed to Kissenger, which you misused to make a point, was Kissenger expressing a fear, in a call to William Buckley in 1968, about Nixon wanting to replace Thieu, and how would perceive that. Kissenger was passionate about America's allies. As for the second quote, he never said that. He said You have mixed up Kissenger with Lord Palmerston Kissenger paraphrased Palmerston when describing Stalin's relationship with the world. The USSR was once a good friend of Afghanistan. Look how it left the country. Russia is a good friend to the Syrian government, look how its leaving the country. Putin is supposedly a good friend to his own people. Check the Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@vasyainthehay. This is a country that considers itself a superpower. It had all the opportunity in the world to transform itself, but instead brought yachts and gold plated toilets. Putin treats his enemies (Chechenya) better than the people most loyal to him (those far flung easter Republics where people live a life still largely untoughed by even the late 20th Century, and who form the core of his troops in Ukraine).

He's in the press today https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/06/suspended-labour-councillor-ricky-jones-denies-encouraging-violent-disorder And this will cause massive conflict among some; https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/labour-councillor-ricky-jones-not-guilty-cut-throats-riots-fascists-disorder-b1180481.html Note, he has spent a month in the 'Scrubs, a hard prison. He might well get bail, but he might not. On the one hand as a councillor (he's now listed as independant), he might be expected to be nicely compliant with the terms of his bail, but on the other hand, his is a councillor, and therefore should be made an example of. Pretty much all the previous cases people have plead guilty once presented with the facts. Jones has decided to plead not guilty, even though he has admitted uttering the words. The arguments will be what he said failed to meet the standards for the offence he was charged for. Lets see how that goes, and if he decides to become a Free Speech martyr with the likes of Tommy "I'm Irish" Robinson and Laurence "I'm now a jobbing actor" Fox rushing to his defence. Or are they conflicted, because he's Labour (and probably pretty old school Labour judging by his bio), and therefore their ideological enemy. The CPS refer cases they think they have a good chance of securing a conviction. He's going away for a while, for excercising he freedom of speech, albeit in the so called heat of the moment, tlling people to go and attack others. s

Its also likely Biden will commute Trump's Federal crimes. And its more likely that a Democrat President can influence a Democrat Governor to commute State crimes, compared to trying to influence a Republican Governor. Trump will not go to jail, for the same reason that Nixon didn't. He will die a convicted felon.

Trump provides clarity on his child care policies: https://www.c-span.org/video/?538141-1/fmr-pres-trump-remarks-economic-club-york

Tankie Tim is off to the FBI to provide assistance, more likely a plea deal. He might be facing time inside after accepting apparently $400k from Russia. Meanwhile

This is how a Strawman argument works. Accuse people of holding a position no one has actually stated. It goes the other way. It could be said that those who have a general objection to homosexuality are obviously in favour of pink triangle badges, work camps, and, eventually, extreme methods. But I realise the US can be a bit strange. Its not uncommon in the US to find a public toilet, the gents, where there are no doors on the stalls, presumably because Americans like watching each other take a dump. Walmart toilet. At least its clean How do you lot manage it? Of course, given your obsession with the toilet and girl's changing rooms, this could be just the thing to civilise public facilties, where we are forced to watch disgustingly fat old people waddle around starkers, or be super awkward at the trough with the bloke who is clearly knocking one out. In much of Continental Europe, you don't have a stall, you have a proper floor to ceiling room, with your own sink. At the public swimming baths, you can struggle into your cossie in the privacy of your own room. Governments will finally spend some money on the ghastly facilities many schools here; many will recall the stone cold khazis, where you stared up at the sky, coz there was no roof.

It would help if they stopped paying builders cash in hand, and buying cannabis from the migrsnt gangmasters, and then say weed never hurt anyone, except the massive laundering of criminal cash going on.

The only illegal immigrants who get free accomodation are those who are part of the Detention Estate; basically in a camp. There are about 2000 in this situation. About 30-35,000 per year are bailed. According to the Home Office, 95% comply with bail conditions (ie they don't abscond). They have no recourse to Public Funds; no benefits. Asylum seekers, ie people who have been determined to be seeking asylum, and by dint, not an illegal immigrant anymore, also don't get benefits, but can get financial help. But the total number of people who should not be in the UK is anywhere between 300,000 and 600,000, plus their kids. They don't claim benefits. They are part of the Black or Shadow economy, which is about 10% of GDP. The authorities don't know who they are, where they are. This is the cash-in-hand economy. 75% of people think there is nothing wrong with paying cash in hand, and, according to YouGov, 65% of people admit to paying tradesmen cash in hand. We all know why people do it; its to get a discount, because no VAT About 90% of peope each year become illegal migrants. About 30,000 arrive on boats; clandestine entry, and likely the vast majority of boats are intercepted. About 11,000 are known to come in the back of a lorry; that will be a fraction. 65-70,000 overstay their visa, but that includes people who genuinely forgot.. About 5000 asylum seekers who were refused asylum are recorded as having never left the country; they disappear into the black economy. 4000 arrive by air without papers or on a fake passport. They don't get far. The issue of the black economy could be tackled in a number of ways: 1. Issue national ID cards for all adults. Intrusive inspections of workplaces, public transport, checkpoints. I'm sure the inspectors will be very polite when they ask for papers, please. Sure, there will be an industry for fake papers, but its harder and harder to fake that, once there is a national DNA and fingerprint database for all individuals. But strangely, those most vociferous about immigration tend to be unethusiastic about this. 2. Crack down on cash in hand jobs.. Likely will have an inflationary impact. 3. The Public take a hardline against soft drugs. When Mo Robinson was discovered with a trailer full of dead Vietnamese, he was set to basically delivery them to slave cannabis farms in and around London. Mo Robinson was from a Loyalist family; he bled red, white and blue. Probably hung Union flags outside his fancy Armagh house every July (young lad, lovely new house, fancy car, all from driving manure trucks). He might have thought of himself as a Patriot. He's doing 20+ years now. These illegals work for basically British gangmasters, in illegal industries that are tolerated by many. One study looked at regularising these illegals. The black economy accounts for 10% of UK GDP. Legalising them would yield about £1 billion in tax receipts, but cost £4.5 billion in benefits. Maybe keep them illegal. Its cheaper.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.627696/gov.uscourts.nysd.627696.2.0.pdf https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-covert-russian-government-sponsored-foreign-malign-influence https://fortune.com/2024/09/04/us-seizes-russian-propaganda-websites-2024-election-meddling/ From the DOJ Indictment So Matt Gaetz was on their radar ("Congressman 1")

DJ Trump at Mar-A-Largo https://www.axios.com/2024/04/04/donald-trump-news-mar-a-lago

https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-mccain-endorse-kamala-harris-vance-31556735c27e032f19799af14ab0b9d2 So, this means he's a Communist?

This wasn't planned; https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4856253-kennedy-ballot-challenge-trump/ I suppose it also means Trumpf at the stage, if he dropped out, would remain on many ballots

Confusion reigned. You were a Kiwi, or a Walt. Blocked.

If Iran is not bothered by NATO, why does it continue to denounce NATO statements regarding Iran's role in Ukraine. Or are you one of those who believes the Iranian government is not supplying Russia with equipment and military know how. https://en.mfa.ir/portal/newsview/749555/Iran-decries-NATO-statement-on-alleged-role-in-Ukraine-war

What was that stabilisation force called in Afghanistan? You claim to have served in the UK armed forces, but aren't too au fait with NATO. You've forgotten Article 6. Article 6 defines NATO's area of operation, which is everywhere above the Tropic of Cancer. Orignal 1949 pre-Turkey text And Iran's location is irrelevant; anyone who attacks territory administered by a NATO member above the Tropic of Cancer would see Article 5 invoked. If Iran attacked the Falklands, well, technically Article 5 wouldn't be invoked. If Iran attacked Diego Garcia, Article 5 would not be invoked, though thst distinction would be largely academic. If Iran attacked Akrotiri, that would invoke Article 5 even though Cyprus is not a member of NATO. Have you ever wondered why, in all these years, Iran, or its proxies, have never had a pop at AKT? Actually, not quite true, Gaddafi (via the "Unified Nasserite Organization", which was never heard of again) took a pop in summer 86, after the US bombed Tripoli, attacking the RAF sailing club with a 80mil mortar and Russian Stalin Organ. You've been there, you know how it is there. You surely knew about article 6, especially why the Falklands War didn't turn into a NATO war. Article 6 also explains why it is a misnomer to suggest Ukraine can never join NATO while it has a territorial dispute with Russia (Article 6 would be modifed to specifically exclude that part of Ukraine, and should also exclude parts of Georgia where there is an ongoing border dispute.'s various colonial wars that were happening at the time. Technically, it also excludes Hawaii, but would include Alaska. Did you really think that if the USSR attacked Alaska, that NATO wouldn't be allowed to act because Alaska is nowhere near Atlantic? Nor is Norway for that matter. Article 6 was created so that NATO wouldn't be dragged in to one of the UK's or France.

Do you think Russia will share all data with the Mullahs, the very definition of an unreliable ally. Two can play at that game. NATO will be learning a lot more about Russian and Iranian capabilities. Recovered missile parts are yielding information on Iranian and Russian design capabilties, but also the supply chain. The Russians and the Iranians are making extensive use of GLOSNASS; a lot of intel about that is being yielded. NATO has far greater capabilties to make use of gathered intelligence than the other way around. In 1990, the US showed not the slightest hesitation at deploying the then brand new Patriot system to the Middle East, knowing all along potential adversaries were watching. In the mid-90s, they deployed Stealth over Serbia, even losing an aircraft in the process. The US and its Allies are not afraid to deploy the necessary hardware where needed. At the moment, they need Russia to stop fighting. They don't want Russia to collapse. Careful calibration is needed.

Trumpf likes Rasmussen, and considers them the most accurate.