Geoff914

I didn't cherry pick it. The BBC news site either the UK or the England page had a high lighted top story, then six other high lighted stories. The Emma Watson story was one high lighted by the BBC. No cherry picking. Clearly the BBC thought that was a top story. Ignore the comments others make.

I don't know about much faster. I wouldn't want to put money on it. But then the UK is cheating by taking the link from Old Oak to Euston out of the scope. Should save a few years.

I will be extremely generous and knock off 2 years for covid so 36% in 6 years which is very conveniently a pathetic 6% a year. Back of a fag packet estimate puts completion on the Bangkok to Korat section as 2035. That seems about right. I would love to see their monthly progress reports.

The students did not return it. "The British Government ordered a major search for the stone, but were unsuccessful. The stone was left by those that had been hiding it on the altar of Arbroath Abbey on 11 April 1951, a property owned by the Church of Scotland. Once the London police were informed of its whereabouts, the stone was returned to Westminster four months after its removal."

I just checked the news. You wont believe what is amongst to to UK news items https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly10x7pjplo I hadn't a clue who Emma Watson was but she was in Harry Potter and she has been banned from driving for 6 months. So there you have it, to the BBC top news items is an actress who I didn't know has been banned from driving.

This is so hard, who care about December onwards. Yes the courts are tied up in knots. It was the July to December that needs to be explained.

Their religion has nothing to do with this. It is you making it about religion. It is about the extreme violence. It is about the fact that the pair of them think that they have done nothing wrong. It is about the CPS dragging their feet for months. Above all it is about the very incident that sparked this off suddenly being thrown in as it has gone to court and the fact that this occurred at an International Airport. Yes Friday night in any town centre this is about par for the course. Not in an airport with masses of surveillance and armed police offices. Nobody is moving goal posts, may be just you. We keep getting the "I am not responding to this rubbish" but up you pop. My comment was to support what CGI Blue said so no need for you to get involved at all.

You conveniently ignore the fact that it was overlooked for a whole year. And we are only now finding out what actually happened, like the assault in Starbucks that was very conveniently swept under the carpet. But the stamp the head was top news.

I am glad I am not the only one finding the whole case bizarre. Happened at the busiest International Airport in the UK outside of London. Armed police officers who would been expected to deal with a terrorist incident, not a couple of run of mill thugs. And yet some people think it is unimportant. The most bizarre aspect of this whole business is that the two thugs think that they have done nothing wrong. Truly amazing.

oh here we go, not International news, blah blah blah. I said UK, England and NW West England. You are the one making it and International story. And yes this, I think, is one of the most important national stories at the moment, that and the boat people. Let's see what is on the England page today: Top England News story https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0qvx52z01o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c14eyexp7mvt https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c75ryqkw4reo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx20xvv1re0o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx20xvv1re0o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev0pm2n9lno https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy7n3n7zjzno The third most important story in England by the BBC is a boy throwing a seat from the top floor of the Westfield shopping centre. It narowly missed shoppers. But guess what the video that was taken went viral. Seventh most important is Le Pong, the French sending us their stinky gas as well as their illegal migrants. Ok probably not the French's fault the wind is blowing this way. The case of the girl killed by the falling branch was tragic and unnecessary. The Sycamore tree felling is very important to a lot of people so rightfully there. So there you have it, the most important News items in England today, according to the BBC.

You don't need to send me the MEN links its is the MEN that I am getting to news on this case from now on. I reiterate I have not seen any high lighted BBC News reports on the UK page of the news or the England page or the NW England page for a number of days. Sorry I don't go searching in the dregs of the BBC archive. This in an important case and as such the BBC should at least have it as a news item on the England page.

Oh believe me I have been searching the BBC news site daily and on days when the MEN the BBC news site that I access had not had any reports on the case. That included searching the UK page, the England page and the NW England page. Yes it will be great if you don't post any of your offensive responses.

I haven't found any BBC reports for over a week. The court has not been closed for that long. There were daily reports in the MEN up until the session closed and nothing on the BBC and believe me I searched. The UK page, the England page, and the NW England page, nothing. Why do you suppose that is when the MEN had stuff to report? Good for you for finding the report from the 14th. I was looking and found nothing.

It has been days since the BBC has reported on the case and it only seems to be the Manchester Evening New still reporting on the case. I wonder if somebody high up in the BBC has decided to censor this case.

This doesn't look good for the Manchester two. The two morons who cut down the tree on Hadrian's wall got 4 years and 3 months. I wonder what a violent assault of 4 people gets you? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/clymgm1v43vt

Is this the video that you are referring to? Seems to me that as the original video was not an official police release but was leaked I assume by security at the airport or may be the police. But why somebody at the police would leak it when it contained the kick I don't know. But as the Mayor of London I fail to see why khan would choose to go public on an issue as serious as this without being in full possession of the facts. May be as the incident occurred in Manchester there would be reason for the Mayor of Manchester to comment but not the Mayor of London who has nothing to do with this incident. The only connection is that Khan of Pakistani descent was commenting to the arrest of two people of Pakistani descent in Manchester. Khan should not use his position as Mayor of London to make personal statements unless it was in private or personal circumstances. He is not and MP and he should keep his private thoughts to himself. Did he comment on Axel Rudakubana or Kyle Clifford, both who also committed very serious offenses back in July 2024. I guess not , I wasn't in the country in July 2024 so all my knowledge is what was published on the BBC. Seems to me that being the person in charge of policing in London Khan should keep his mouth shut about criticising the police and saying nothing about two violent offenders. Better still until this had gone to court say nothing at all.

I wasn't really arguing about semantics. I didn't know what you were referring to, in fact I still don't. I haven't see the particular post of the video. It is difficult sometimes to keep abreast what is going on on these contentious threads. I was confused as to why something written here would be slanderous. Hence why I checked.

Look who is talking. When somebody suggests a better way of putting something over you shout nit picking.

Just trying to educate you. If I make a mistake I am happy to be be put right by a more knowledgeable people. If in doubt do what I do and run it through Google first. Just take few minutes.

"Posting an untrue video on social media that harms someone's reputation can be considered libel or slander, depending on the context. Libel refers to defamatory statements that are published or broadcast (like a video), while slander refers to spoken defamation. In the context of social media, a video would typically be considered libel because it's a permanent, recorded medium" So published therefore libel. The person speaking I assume would have been committed slander unless it was them that published the video. In am not legally qualified to say and I guess neither are you.

Double Eh?

He is a politician, he can take it. Did we get an apology for the fact that he knows full well what a grooming gang is? Isn't slander verbal, do you mean libel?

Because there was an agenda of course, just the same as the 5 months to bring charges. And before anybody says it was complicated the same month we had the cross bow murders https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg70vjmv08ro. This was complicated but Kyle Clifford was charged within 2 months, not 5 months. Again the same month Axel Rudakubana was charged within 2 days.

Today in court. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/ive-never-felt-punch-like-32057873