Message boards : The Lounge : Let's talk politics
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
Gary CharpentierSend message Joined: 23 Feb 08 Posts: 2560
|
Ah the Rump playbook. |
JordSend message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15866
|
You have evidence of that, or is it just easier to point and say he did or does want this? |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Though the Conservative Party are also taking advantage of this in areas they are likely to lose seats. (I am absolutely against this in all areas whichever party is hanging on to power with this mechanism.) In other news, it looks like the left won't be able to flood the internet with pictures of Musk in a bikini. |
Gary CharpentierSend message Joined: 23 Feb 08 Posts: 2560
|
not him, but copycats. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Meanwhile, back in Blighty, another Tory joins Reform. What Jenrick and Farage have said about eachother makes fascinating reading |
JordSend message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15866
|
When in the UK, do not film anything where cars drive by, as then you're eligible for arrest under the Terrorism Act. Not my words, but that of this UK cop telling this UK man why he's being arrested! https://x.com/i/status/2013320311983272408 Also, do not tell others to speak English in England, as that's a crime as well. https://x.com/i/status/2013306229758529995 |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
In reply to Jord's message of 20 Jan 2026: When in the UK, do not film anything where cars drive by, as then you're eligible for arrest under the Terrorism Act. Clearly a misuse of the Terrorism Act 2,000. https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice/ Section 58A of the Terrorism Act 2000 Section 58A of the Terrorism Act 2000 covers the offence of eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of the armed forces, intelligence services or police where the information is, by its very nature, designed to provide practical assistance to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. Any officer making an arrest for an offence under Section 58A must be able to demonstrate a reasonable suspicion that the information was, by its very nature, designed to provide practical assistance to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. |
JordSend message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15866
|
Watch what you mumble over your beer in the pub. "Bars and Pub staff will be expected to report people to the Police if they overhear "Conversations, Remarks, Comments or Jokes that an employee may find offensive" With video of Lord Young explaining this. https://x.com/i/status/2014964966546145590 |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
"Bars and Pub staff will be expected to report people to the Police if they overhearLord Young is wrong in his interpretation of the act. Reporting anything that might be deemed offensive if overheard to the police would be going beyond, "Reasonable steps" which is the key phrase in the act. That is why so many cases have been thrown out on making it as far as court and even more deemed not to be worth taking to court by the Crown Prosecution Service. That said, I still think the act is while well intentioned, badly written and has encouraged the interpretation by Lord Young and others. It needs looking at again and the bar for prosecution raised so that only the more egregious examples are prosecuted. |
JordSend message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15866
|
When you can interpret an Act in multiple ways, you best make sure it's worded correctly in the first place. That is why so many cases have been thrown out on making it as far as court and even more deemed not to be worth taking to court by the Crown Prosecution Service.And what if it's not about getting you to court, but to intimidate you into not doing it again? In that other people around you will point at you because you may have done something wrong? It's intimidation tactics. Just like it is that you can be arrested and charged and sent to jail for posting a meme and immediately removing it, because it can have offended someone. Yes, individuals in England can and have gone to jail for posting content on social media, even if they later remove it. The UK legal system treats online content as public statements, and actions such as inciting racial hatred, threatening violence, or spreading grossly offensive material can lead to criminal charges and imprisonment. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Lucy Connolly, a 41-year-old former childminder from Northampton, England, was sentenced to 31 months in prison for a social media post that was removed shortly after being posted.Given that her post which falsely stated the person committing a crime was an asylum seeker and that her post being reposted ad nauseam led to rioters attempted to set fire to a hostel where asylum seekers were housed, I have no problem with her going to jail. Those events had already happened by the time she removed it. I do not see the right of free speech as absolute. |
Gary CharpentierSend message Joined: 23 Feb 08 Posts: 2560
|
In reply to Dave's message of 24 Jan 2026: I do not see the right of free speech as absolute. Ah, thought control. It is what Rump is trying to impose. Look at what he is doing to late night television. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Ah, thought control. It is what Rump is trying to impose. Look at what he is doing to late night television. I have lived without television for over 30 years. The fact that it can now take over an hour to discover there is nothing worth watching as opposed to the seconds to check three channels when I was growing up does nothing to encourage me to get one again. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Now that it has come out that the father of one of the recent victims of ICE agents was a Trump supporter, he now says, “You know, when the woman was shot, I felt terribly about it,†|
|
Send message Joined: 30 Mar 20 Posts: 707
|
Now the real preparation for the U.S dictatorship begins, as expected. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0ngrjy22jo https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-executing-search-warrant-election-office-georgia-related-2020-vote-fox-news-2026-01-28/ FBI raids Fulton County, Georgia election office over 2020 voter fraud claims. (Remember the votes Trump wanted and needed?) This is for sure not the last FBI raid on election offices, that Trump lost in 2020. On his order, FBI will find the votes he wants, whether or not they are there or not. Result: Trump will claim that he won the 2020 election, and have the right to stay for 6 more years. So: 1. No midterm election in November this year. 2: No Presidential election in 2028. After that, no more free and fair elections in the U.S. And of course, the Supreme Court which already is in his pockets, will not step in and stop this. Remember who the guy was that trained Trump? Roy Cohn, the known mafia lawyer...... ( The "Attack, attack, never defend" guy) The same mafia lawyer that also "helped" the Scientology leader L.Ron Hubbard, create and totally control the cult. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Result: Trump will claim that he won the 2020 election, and have the right to stay for 6 more years.Alternatively, he won last time so his second term is over and it is time for fresh elections now! |
|
Send message Joined: 30 Mar 20 Posts: 707
|
In reply to Dave's message of 29 Jan 2026: Highly unlikely outcome. However this ends, it will not end well. No constitution is strong enough to survive someone who doesn't care about the constitution, and also have the Supreme Court in his pockets.Result: Trump will claim that he won the 2020 election, and have the right to stay for 6 more years.Alternatively, he won last time so his second term is over and it is time for fresh elections now! The so called American experiment will fail with the orange one, and turn into a Putin style dictatorship, with fake elections. Elections that always will favor the sitting dictator. The Trump government, has done, and still do, so many unconstitutional moves, that they simply can't afford to lose any elections. The result of them losing elections now, will be that thousands of those who served under Trump, and followed his unconstitutional orders, will be prosecuted and put in jail for life. So, therefore, there will not be any free and fair elections from now on. |
DaveSend message Joined: 28 Jun 10 Posts: 3256
|
Highly unlikely outcome.Yea. I don't really expect that to happen. The really scary thing is the reaction of the MAGA conspiracy theorists if he dies of natural causes. Also, I think Vance might be even worse! |
|
Send message Joined: 30 Mar 20 Posts: 707
|
In reply to Dave's message of 29 Jan 2026: Gosh yeah. Just looking into the eyes of Vance, tells a lot. That's just scary. He's going to be even worse than the orange one.Highly unlikely outcome.Yea. I don't really expect that to happen. The really scary thing is the reaction of the MAGA conspiracy theorists if he dies of natural causes. Also, I think Vance might be even worse! |
|
Send message Joined: 30 Dec 05 Posts: 507
|
I think Vance might be even worse! +1 You are absolutely correct there. |
Copyright © 2026 University of California.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License,
Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.