19 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Just criticise  everything without offering a better solution .

That is so easy to do, just point fingers at other people and say how bad they are  and being unable to offer a better way to do things .

   For the fourth time, there wasn't a problem with illegal immigration coming from France 13 years ago and there was no need to take any new measures to curb a non existent problem  .

   Problems began three years ago and new measures were taken to fix those problems 

   

For the fourth time?  Every time you make the same ridiculous point it emphasises that it is the tories who have sleep-walked into this debacle.  As I had to say to you in the end last night- I have better things to do with my time, so I'm done here.  Enjoy your day/ evening.

24 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I will make the point for the third and last time .

Boat people arriving in the UK  wasn't previously a problem and has only became a problem in the last few years and the U.K Gov have responded to those problems and have now taken measures to stop it . 

   It wasn't a problem 12 years ago and thus no action was taken 

 

You can <deleted> into the wind all you like.  The tories have failed to manage their uk immigration responsibly in the 13 years they have been in power and have created a cluster-**** that they are now flailing around trying to blame on the most abject powerless people.

They will be gone at the next GE thanks be to your deity of choice.

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

You seemed to have misunderstood my point . 

Shall I make the point again ?

5 years ago it wasn't such a big problem, with just 764 people sailing across and its only became a problem recently with 45 756 people sailing across last year .

   The UK could accommodate 764 people per year , it cannot accommodate 45 756 people per year and that's why action is being taken now 

It's a theory.  Here's another.  It's basically the same as yours but recognises the fault of the present government in the issue:

The UK population has finally started to take note of the dreadful mess the tories have made of governing the country (including immigration) in their time in power.  The immigration/ refugee nonsense helps them to manipulate the (dwindling) daily mail readers who are still willing to vote for them.

4 minutes ago, James105 said:

Okay well there are over a hundred there so lets pick one at random.  The birth certificate.  This is an accurate record of someones birth that (presumably trans) want to change to become a lie.   Non trans people do not have the right to change their birth certificates and I am not allowed to change my date of birth to what I identify as (10 years younger) as that would be changing a fact into a lie.   This is understandable but presumably trans people have the ability to legally change their names just like everyone else does if they wish to be known by a different name?   

 

These are not "anti-trans" bills.  They just affirm the same rights everyone else has.   Which right do trans people specifically not have that other humans have?     

Are trans people demanding to change their date of birth on a driving licence?  I agree that seems ridiculous.  I will leave you to report back on the rest if you actually find anything of note.

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Due the the numbers, it hasn't previously been such a big issue 

The amount of boat people was manageable 

   There were 764 people coming across the English channel in 2018 and that rose to 45 756 last year

   764 people arriving by boat per year was manageable , 45 758 people arriving isn't manageable and that is why action is now being taken 

 

I see you are in full agreement with Chomper's [most excellent] point:

Quote

Over twelve years to get it right, and still failing.

I wonder how they can mess it up worse than the present shambles.  

2 hours ago, James105 said:

What rights are they being denied?  As far as I can make out they are not allowing kids to make permanent life altering changes to their bodies until they are an adult, in much the same way as kids cannot get tattooed until they are 18.   

 

Other than that, what rights are they missing that other humans have?  

Luckily for you the post right below you answers your question and points out the fallacy of your hand-wringing. 

 https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/over-120-bills-restricting-lgbtq-rights-introduced-nationwide-2023-so-far

You may be happy to deny the rights of other people dependent on your life view, but most (happily) are not.

28 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The U.K , USA and Australia all joining together 

What is the common denominator for that unification ?

Colonisation?

2 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

the bbc is a 5th column operation gravy train ,Rees mogg is pushing for them to lose their compulsory licence fee and then they wont be able to pay mega salares to nobodys

 

lineker is on 250k for a days work down from 500k

 

bbc is full of lefty muckrakers

Don't forget your meds before your hot milk.

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

How long have we got to point out the difference between your and you’re ????

Seemingly for ever, and ever, and ever... ????

27 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The probation service stated the he breached his licencing conditions and they didn't go into detail , its a legal matter and they don't disclose their private information .

   Their info was that he breached the conditions , so back to jail he goes .

Agreed.  The irresponsible reporting and flimsy journalism is all the responsibility of the newspaper.  I would be interested to know if there is any nugget of truth in their report or they're making it up as usual.  No doubt more details will emerge.

Many people seem to be commenting on gadd's early release which is perhaps a better (and more on topic) focus than the guttersnipe ethics of Murdoch's rags.

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Have you thought about reading a different news source ?

The Sun isn't regarded as a quality newspaper , and there's no need to state that as everyone knows that .

Agreed.  I take most issue with their lies and hypocrisy, but of course we are way off topic here, so I'll leave it there.

5 minutes ago, mrfill said:

A 'source' said “Glitter is suspected of trying to access prohibited material online. It is thought those attempts were unsuccessful, but that in itself is enough to reach the recall threshold. However, his phone will now be forensically analysed to determine exactly what he might have been searching for.”

Knowing the Sun, a 'source' means a bribed cop.

That's the thing really- it's just dreadful sensationalist journalism.  Is 'being suspected of' enough to trigger the recall or is there a need for evidence, did he really try to access the dark web, or did he just make an enquiry about tor?  

Regardless, I have no sympathy for the dreadful man.

14 minutes ago, mrfill said:

It doesn't follow.

Accessing, or attempting to access the dark web was one of the conditions of his licence that would mean an immediate recall (like getting into a relationship with anyone who has a child under 18).

He attempted to access the dark web, he got recalled.

 

The Sun and Fox are very much related. Both being Rupert Murdoch's organs (for the time being) and devoted to the lunatic fringe of society.

Using tor is not any sort of evidence of accessing the dark web though.   Perhaps he was banned from using anonymizing procedures? 

But as Bradiston says the Sun, like so many of the right wing papers, just spout disinformation to manipulate their audience.  Like in Murdoch's Fox, facts are to be avoided in Murdoch's Sun.

4 minutes ago, James105 said:

Try not to be so sensitive.   I've no idea what alt-right actually is but I am no fan of the Tories so could not care less what happens to them.   The problem with people on the left though is that they do tend to see minorities as one single homogenous group who all share the same views and are not able to see them as individuals that have their own minds.  Try reading this article to get a different opinion of what other holocaust survivors thought of what Lineker said:

 

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/shame-on-you-holocaust-survivor-tells-lineker-over-asylum-policy-tweet-4zb8cBppRtzYvTlwpQUNos

 

Try not to offer unsolicited advice with no basis in reality or the topic.  Other than that I have no interest in your bloviating.

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What do you , Linekar and the best of you think about what should U.Ks immigration policy be ?

   Should the U.K have an open door policy where anyone from anywhere can come and stay in the U.K for ever ?

   What do the "best of you" think should be the U.Ks immigration policy ?

Do you think Gary Lineker and I have conversations about UK immigration policy.  Another ridiculous attempt to troll from the far-right board members.

1 hour ago, James105 said:

Indeed.  I do think that he should be asked to go and speak to some survivors of the holocaust so that they can help him to understand the differences between the actual Nazi's and what they did and the current Tory government.   It's never too late for someone to get a bit of education about history.  This will help prevent him from getting a bit confused about policies that are designed to save people from drowning by making a treacherous journey across the English channel with policies that are designed to basically commit genocide and kill millions of people.       

What nonsense you alt right people talk, you can't help but misrepresent everything you come across. The tories will be in the bin soon.   Here is an actual holocaust survivor proving the point. 

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

 

I wouldn't call it an agender against her , I disagree with her behaviour , her victim playing and race baiting . 

   IMO, these people are are cause of racism .

But I just disagree with her, far from having an agender against her .

   I disagree with her charity buying a big house in London , which she will live in full time and kindly allow victims of violent abuse to stay for a week with her .

   The recent publicity she got from the Lady Hussey story will boost her charities income  and give her the opportunity to buy that big house......................the big house for victims of abuse .

   She is a victim of violence  and abuse as well , caused by this story, so she says 

Perhaps you would not, but your own words above prove the point.  Anyway, as I said, I am not criticising your stance.

(Nice to have a pleasant discussion with you about this on this occasion, but no more from me).

56 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Viewing figures were up but at 20 mins long instead of 80 minutes and with no commentators I would guess it was more of a novelty must see. 

 

Broadcaster Piers Morgan said in a tweet that Lineker’s suspension was “pathetically spineless.”

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/bizarre-20-minutes-match-day-101323439.html

I'm surprised to see that comment from arch troll Piers Morgan.  He must be trying to improve his 'woke' credit rating to launch another attack on civility and decency.

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

As I was the poster who posted the lasted on the story , I would just like to state that I do not have an agenda to push .

   I dislike racists and race baiters and people who use alleged racism to further their own causes , people who make false claims of racism for self gain .

   Those are the people that I oppose

You may feel it is a noble one, but what you have just described about your motivations is literally a perfect example of having an agenda.

(Not to comment on the agenda itself or your resultant views.)

4 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

You don't appear to be authorised by this forum for approving or rejecting content of these forums so your comment of it doesn't cut the mustard is without foundation

MOTD's replacement was 'like first Covid lockdown' but some viewers preferred it

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/tv/silent-motd-like-first-covid-26451557

 

And here is a Tory Lite media outlet 

Match Of The Day viewing figures up half a million with no hosts after Gary Lineker crisis

Match Of The Day viewing figures were up to 2.58million from last Saturday's figure of 2.09million, according to BARB overnights

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/breaking-match-day-viewing-figures-29435870

Again thanks for posting the links.  My comment about 'not cutting the mustard' was a personal one about sources I'm willing to trust.

Your first link is unfortunately useless as it is just a list of twitter comments pushing an unfounded opinion.  The second is better though.  I don't know what BARB is but at least it gives a potential anchor in reality and objectivity.  Funny it's a left wing tabloid though.

34 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Viewing figures rise for Match of the Day without Lineker

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/viewing-figures-rise-for-match-of-the-day-without-lineker/

 

BBC Match of the Day viewers call for surprising permanent change after Gary Lineker exit

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/showbiz-tv/bbc-match-day-viewers-call-26451556

Thank you for posting the link vinny41.  Apparently member "champers" is too important to follow the rules.

EDIT TO ADD:  There is no source to the only data which is that provided in the spectator link.  They are a tory rag so I'm afraid it doesn't cut the mustard.

17 minutes ago, champers said:

MOTD had half a million extra viewers last night. Source: BBC World News website.

Post a link or delete you post.