Cameroni

But it doesn't matter, because the law which put Lucy Connolly in prison does not require a specific nationality, a nationality suffices. And I'm pretty sure that the boat invaders have a nationality. You see how she's caught? Nothing she could have done. That argument would not have helped her.

Actually you're completely wrong. She spoke about the "boat invaders". The group of immigrants who arrive by boat in England are well known and also their national and ethnic make-up is well known. So by inference, by referring to "boat invaders" it can easily be inferred that Lucy Connolly was referring to Afghans, Eritreans, Iranians, and Syrians, who make up most of the immmigrants arriving by boat in England currently. That's all that is required since the 1986 Public Order act merely requires "nationality"and clearly the boat "invaders" have a nationality. I hope that clears it up for you.

Yes it is, nevertheless, it was false in this instance. The attack that Lucy Connolly referred to was perpetrated by a UK national born in Wales, though admittedly, police did not help matters by not releasing the name of the defendant, though they insisted the arab sounding name reported by Channel 3 was false. It certainly adds to the poignant tragedy of Ms Connolly that her rage was ignited by a wholly FALSE report on Channel 3 which did claim that the assailant had an arab sounding name and was an immigrant. Which was not the case. Full details below. https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/southport-stabbing-suspect-was-born-uk-say-police-2024-07-30/ Connolly's statement would be open to an interpretation of incitement to racial hatred because the Public Order Act 1986 defines race in an extremely broad sense which includes nationality, so race is not even required. Since the assailant has a nationality, as do immigrants, no matter which way you turn it, Connolly's statements would be caught under the 1986 Public Order Act. Which is a very typical strategy btw, the law defines things extremely broadly so that the state has discretion to prosecute or not. Personally, I despise incitement laws and would abolish them in almost every instance, or water them down so cases like this don't even get prosecuted. Nobody was served by Lucy Connolly being in prison as long as she was.

Camilla was a virgin? She doesn't look it, kudos King Charles.

You do realise that "white" is a 'race" right? Or rather, as we now call them an "ethnic cluster". So in the case of Albanians we would probably deep dive that into Roman era western Balkan populations, with additional admixture from Slavic-related groups. But I'd have to look up Cavalli-Sforza to be certain. Of course this is largely academic, interesting as it is, since the Public Order Act 1986 was drafted by lawyers who foresaw this issue and thus used the following terminology: The Public Order Act 1986 defines "racial hatred" as hatred against a group of people based on their colour, race, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins. So strictly speaking a full on ethnic cluster or race reference is not even necessary. Nationality or ethnic origin suffice.

Not really in the context of some of the quotes by Lucy Connolly, as she referred to a specific sword attack, which would have been committed by a specific person of a specific ethnic group and race.

Of course immigrants have a race. For instance Nigerians belong to the Niger-Congo ethnic cluster. The Chinese belong to the East-Asian ethnic cluste. Interestingly most Afghans also belong to the Iranian ethnic cluster. Also note that whilst "race" is mentioned, it is not required, as the law also refers to "ethnic group", so Syrians, Afghans etc would all qualify under that anyway..

You may have a point here. I just view it as stupidity and circumstances that impel a woman to become a bar girl, I may be too generous, but when you see how they KNOW that they are not liked by anyone for selling their box to obese smelly men, you do feel kind of sorry for them. Maybe it's just me.

That's very true. I remember having sex with this Filipina in a condo in London, and she was screaming in the throes of orgasm seven or eight times in a row. I thought it was charming, but I got this irate muslim chap come knock on my door to complain. Some people are very sensitive.

She's right of course, it's an extraordinary achievement, to become president a second time, a bit like when Muhammad Ali came back to be Heavyweight Champion. Now, I'm not saying Trump is a world class heavyweight boxer, but he would beat the living daylights out of Bernie Sanders.

Just par for the course for a lawyer, if you had read De l'esprit des lois, ("The Spirit of the Law") by Montesquieu, you would know that when interpreting laws and any text we look not just at the words but at the spirit of the laws and words, to see what they really convey. And I'm afraid poor Lucy Connolly really had a temporary lapse of emotional control where she was inciting violence according to the laws of England, and I think if you look at the substance of her text AND the spirit of that text then there is absolutely no doubt what she was trying to say. Now, of course, I vastly sympathise in that her motivation was the killing of children and one may say her outburst was a normal human reaction, nevertheless, under the law there is no question at all that her outburst was incitement to violence and also incitement to racial hatred. None at all. What's more the regrettable thing is that since incitement is one of these odious inchoate offences, the Crown didn't even need to prove that the burning of the hotels was directly caused by her words, something that I would personally require. But, alas, the laws are what they are. Under the law of England, "incitement to racial hatred" was established as an offence by the provisions of ss. 17–29 of the Public Order Act 1986, punishable by two years' imprisonment (now seven years). It was first established as a criminal offence in the Race Relations Act 1976. This offence refers to: deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group distributing racist material to the public making inflammatory public speeches creating racist websites on the Internet inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group, for the purpose of spreading racial discontent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement_to_ethnic_or_racial_hatred As you can see, therefore the words "I bet my house it was one of these boat invaders" when uttered in relation to a sword attack rather lend themselves to being interpreted as "deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group" and also "making inflammatory public speeches" and also "Inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group for the purpose of spreading racial discontent". Now, was Lucy Connolly treated excessively harshly, given her circumstances, I would say personally yes she was. Was she innocent of what she pled guilty to, absoiutely f"£$"%ng not.

We all know that was just locker room talk meant for the lads. Around women he was always a gentleman. The woman said so herself.

See, that's just the kind of thing Donald Trump would never say. Because he's a gentleman. He may say "sleazebag", but never "scumbag". It's these little differences that make the true gentleman.

I did. For the kids. Not anymore. Our youngest accidentally hit the remote and the gate opened, so these two strays came in and viciously ripped the rabbits to shreds. I took a stick and beat the living daylights out of these killer dogs, they were lucky I didn't kill them.

Sorry, but that's an extremely flimsy argument. The spirit of Lucy Connolly's texts was very obviously not meant to convey her indifference to burning immigrants or hotels, but rather it is quite obvious that her message was meant to convey extreme anger, disgust and that message would be interpreted as incitement by 99% of judges. Her text was not meant to convey "ambivalence", it was very clear what she was saying. She also tweeted, commenting on a sword attack "I bet my house it was one of these boat invaders.” So there's really no question that her texts were incitement under the laws in the UK. Otherwise she wouldn't have pled guilty of course. And by the way, I have successfully argued legal matters in the Senior Courts of England, so my English is vastly superior to yours.

Of course they are lazy and want easy money. And yes they get it. But at what price? They know 80% percent of the population, excluding BritManToo mercifully, look down on them and ostracise them. Thailand is not like the UK where Bonnie Blue can make 24 million GBP a year by doing gangbangs and many accept and admire her, in Thailand bar girls are very much viewed with disdain and disgust by most people. Even if BritManToo loves them dearly. And indeed, I do feel sorry for all the people who have no way to escape poverty. If I had Bezos' money I'd give them all 100,000 baht, though that would probably cause massive inflation.

Stop talking nonsense, Ghislaine Maxwell was never tried or convicted of perjury. Maxwell was never tried or convicted of perjury: The charges were separated from her other counts prior to her 2021 trial, and when she sought a retrial of her sex trafficking charges, prosecutors offered to drop the perjury charges as long as her conviction on the other, more serious, counts was allowed to stand. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2025/07/24/what-to-know-about-ghislaine-maxwells-alleged-perjury-as-she-speaks-with-doj-today-about-epstein/

So Trump is a real gentleman. He does come over that way, doesn't he? Not a real surprise, he's a great human being allround. Women saying he's a real gentleman, not really a surprise. But good to see it confirmed.

That can happen. The thing is Lucy Connolly had made social media texts that were on record. There was no way she could argue herself out of "burn the hotels for all I care". So she had no real defense. If she had opted to go to trial the judge would have handed her a harsher sentence still than what she got with the guillty plea, which was already harsh. So she probably made the right decision.

The dogs probably killed the rabbits those people were keeping. Happened to me. I almost beat those mutts to death. It's very vexing.

I feel sorry for them as well. i was just talking to a beautiful 24 year old but I could sense something was a bit off for her. So she tells me her sister works as a bar girl. I say, aha, and she never took you to the bar? And she replies "Yes, but I'm afraid. I know nobody likes bar girls". So what really happened is that she's the one working in the bar, but she knows guys won't like to hear that, so she says her sister works in a bar to test the waters. They know men don't like bar girls. They know it. You have to feel sorry for them.

This is a beautiful thing, flying the flag. Now you just need to choose a hero city for your movment! Then a big march onto London and you can take power from this weak democratic leader Starmer! Then a 1000 year empire!

Women see money differentlly to men. If you're an attractive woman all your life you're basically just GIVEN money whenever you need it. So a woman cannot appreciate the hard work and sacrifice it takes to earn that money. You see kindness, generosity and sacrifice when you give that money. She just feels entitled to that money. It's nothing special to her. She got it all her life. She just sees money. It's good, but no more than that.

Why, lol, Richard Lionheart didn't have lions in England and you're okay with that. The FA uses 3 lions and there are no lions in England. Let's plaster lions anywhere, willy nilly!!! Lol.

NATO drills show it is preparing for potential conflict with Russia NATO's four-month long military exercises near Russia's borders, known as Steadfast Defender, are proof the alliance is preparing for a potential conflict with Russia, a spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry said on Saturday. "Right now, NATO's largest exercise since the Cold War, Steadfast Defender, is taking place near Russia's borders. According to their scenario, coalition's actions against Russia are being practiced using all the instruments, including hybrid and conventional weapons," she said in a statement. "We have to admit that NATO is seriously preparing for a 'potential conflict' with us." https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-drills-show-it-is-preparing-potential-conflict-with-russia-moscow-says-2024-05-04/