You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Anyway, back on topic… imagine that?… it seems like all the rioters are going for the ‘I was swept up in the moment’ defence.
Channel 4 news just showed some police bodycam footage of a nobhead who used that defence. The copper was in a police van while an angry Neanderthal tried repeatedly to stove in the window next to him with a big lump of concrete. He said, perfectly understandably, that he feared for his life
The baseball-capped bell end tried that defence and got 3 years when the judge dismissed his ‘swept up in the moment’ bollocks for what it is
I think we’ve all been ‘swept up in the moment’ on occasion without that involving trying to stove a police van in with half a concrete fence post
So this thread, like so many others, has become ‘that’ thread, courtesy of the usual suspects….
The last link I posted was actually about Yvette Cooper.
Do you want each cabinet member to have their own individual thread in case anyone says anything mildly critical about any of them and you get offended?
Seems like a lot of work for the rest of us but I know you view this place as your own personal sandpit so I guess we should all do our best to keep you happy.
I'm not quite sure how the thread I started calling out the toxic behaviour of the far right, Farage and their Tory enablers has suddenly become the fault of Starmer and his brand new government. Mind you it was all going to be Starmers fault even before his party was elected.
Please can we for once focus on the real perpetrators of the recent disgusting behaviour, Farage and the brain dead scum who trashed people's homes and neighbourhoods for no reason at all.
I’m not quite sure how the thread I started calling out the toxic behaviour of the far right, Farage and their Tory enablers has suddenly become the fault of Starmer and his brand new government. Mind you it was all going to be Starmers fault even before his party was elected.
If you read every seventh word written then yes, I can see how you could come to the conclusion that that is the point we are trying to make.
Please can we for once focus on the real perpetrators of the recent disgusting behaviour, Farage and the brain dead scum who trashed people’s homes and neighbourhoods for no reason at all.
Yes, let's relentlessly focus all our attention on these people. There are, after all, the only ones who can provide any kind of leadership and effect any kind of change in society.
Starmer and Labour might as well be a bunch of house plants, so what they are saying and doing is irrelevant.
Argee you are simply regurgitating Patel/Braverman/Sunak/Tory claims that there are safe routes for all asylum seekers and those who make the dangerous crossing, risking their lives, do so unnecessarily.
It is a genuine question, i'm all for asylum and immigration, the UK needs it to thrive in the future, but as stated earlier, there are safe asylum routes, as there has always been, but what is Starmer against in whatever the question posed was?
I know a few specific answers, but not the specifics behind this one, what would be a viable new safe asylum route, and how would it work, is this what is being asked, i.e. a specific 'why not do this', or is it just a generic 'do another safe route' without any real information behind it?
there are safe asylum routes, as there has always been,
There aren’t, outside of a few very limited ones.
I’m not quite sure how the thread I started calling out the toxic behaviour of the far right, Farage and their Tory enablers has suddenly become the fault of Starmer and his brand new government
The same 5 or 6 members of the PFJ can (and do) turn a thread about literally anything into a tirade about Keir Starmer and how in his 6 weeks in power he has failed the nation
Cancer - Keir Starmers fault
Poverty - Keir Starmers fault
Next doors cat shitting in your garden… ?
You get the picture…
has suddenly become the fault of Starmer and his brand new government
What a daft comment. No one, no one at all, has claimed that the riots were Starmer's "fault". You are bemoaning the direction the thread has taken and you come out with silly comments which are hardly conducive to a sensible discussion.
The reality is that Starmer is now prime minister..... the buck stops with him. Personally, as I have repeatedly said, I think that he dealt with the riots reasonably well. However I also believe it was wrong of him not to highlight Farage's culpability and holding him to account, particularly for his social media misinformation.
Yes that is a mild criticism of Starmer and yes I know that like a few others you believe no criticism should ever be directed at Starmer, because presumably he never says or ever does anything wrong.
However not everyone adheres to this ridiculous and extraordinarily unhealthy attitude so maybe just try to deal with it?
And getting back to the fact that Starmer is now actually prime minister, did you actually read the link that I posted? Voters make it clear that they hold him responsible for whatever the ongoing situation is.
When the rioting was in full swing Starmer's popularity fell and now that it has stopped and the rioters are recieving very significant sentences his popularity has shot up. It might be unfair to attach so much responsibility on the prime minister but that's the way the cookie crumbles - the buck stops with him.
And it works both ways. Whilst the rioting might not have been his responsibility nor are the harsh sentences being passed by the courts, and yet he is still reaping the rewards of that.
Brucewee you're just being ridiculous, what has happened is purely down to the culture wars stoked by the right. Trying to some how pin this on the current government reeks of desperation to justify your obvious dislike of the current Labour party and is rather sad.
Starmer is treading a fine line and I'm not sure what else he can do, he's come down hard on the rioters, or at least the courts and police have and he's supported them. Coming out now announcing anything seen as too immigrant friendly would have been pouring petrol on the fire and given the scum rioting justification j their minds for their 'protests'. We all know the answer to this is to properly reform the asylum system and improve people's lives, neither of which are easy or quick. The vandalism of the previous government didn't just stop at running the immigration service into the ground, they also tore up most of our established treaties and agreements with our partners through the travesty of Brexit.
Cancer – Keir Starmers fault
Poverty – Keir Starmers fault
Next doors cat shitting in your garden… ?
You get the picture…
Nope, I don't get the picture. Obviously no one has ever said that Starmer is responsible for cancer so are you saying that Starmer must never be criticised....is that the point your hyperbole is trying to make?
Edit: Btw you claimed to wanted to stick to the thread's topic. Your last post did not contain one single reference to the subject matter. Is it a rule which you think other people should stick to but somehow it doesn't apply to you?
Trying to some how pin this on the current government reeks of desperation to justify your obvious dislike of the current Labour party and is rather sad.
You know it's possible to be responsible for something without it being your fault?
Labour and Starmer are now in charge. That means they are now responsible for fixing things. Things the had no part in causing.
If you didn't want them to be responsible you probably shouldn't have voted for them.
And yes, with responsibility comes scrutiny and sometimes criticism. It's not a football team. You don't mindlessly support them no matter what and anyone who isn't with you is against you.
Well, you can, of course. Although I'd say that's a fairly stupid way of looking at a government.
Bruce how about not focusing so much on justifying the right to be critical of the Prime Minister and instead focusing on the subject matter?
No matter how much the usual suspects complain Starmer will never be above criticism, so maybe just ignore their tedious and predictable moaning.
If only he had a beard and an allotment…
i don’t understand. Maybe if you posted a picture … ??
Everyone on this thread has you nailed for what you are.
You can't undo that, ever.
Think on that for a while.
I would suggest a period of self-reflection. You'll probably dismiss that out of hand. Whatever.
That's the end of my interaction with you on this topic.
Fin.
6 weeks in power and all the countries ills aren’t fixed yet
TBF there are 195 countries and he's only responsible for one of them.
So this thread, like so many others, has become ‘that’ thread, courtesy of the usual suspects….
...
The same 5 or 6 members of the PFJ can (and do) turn a thread about literally anything into a tirade about Keir Starmer
Ah, irony.
Do you want each cabinet member to have their own individual thread
I'm surprised there's many Cabinet! Members! who don't by now.
Everyone on this thread has you nailed for what you are.
If you two expended as much effort into explaining what you actually did mean when asked, as you are expending in squawking about how misunderstood you are, we'd have put this spat to bed several pages back.
As it stands you should probably be grateful that the Report links aren't working.
I'm starting to think that anyone that posts in the political threads should have a mandatory shag before posting**.
** I shall have to provide a doctors note as my prosthetic cock is still... well, this pic says it better:
****stan arrests man over Southport attack disinformation
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20718gdwj6o
I have heard that Starmer was in ****stan when that was posted but did nothing to stop it.
He just shrugged and mumbled something about only 4 weeks in power.
Bruce how about not focusing so much on justifying the right to be critical of the Prime Minister and instead focusing on the subject matter?
Could do, although whenever someone posts something it tends to get drowned out in the cries of anguish over the victimisation of Starmer.
I first wrote about what I was worried about 3 or 4 days ago. Then the Guardian columns started voicing the same concerns I have:
And then Amnesty International also said the same:
It is essential to de-couple the link people have in their heads between immigrants (with little distinction made between illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, asylum seekers, and for some reason Muslims) and their standard of living being reduced.
Maybe we all have nothing better to do than sit around and hate Starmer, but the racists and the terminally ignorant don't see to love him or Labour much either. Why does Labour's policy seem to be to appease them?
Why is the aim not to finally start getting get over this national malaise of the government blaming foreigners (and Muslims) for the fact people can't get an appointment with their GP? This actually started with Blair and was turned up to 11 once the turbo-headbanger Tories got the keys to the house.
But yeah, if you want to tell everyone that me, the Guardian, and Amnesty International we have nothing better to do but sit around hating Starmer all day then crack on.
The way I see it, the government, fans of organised immigration and wanting to be seen as effective and proactive, are putting things in place to expedite the processing of legal immigrants and the "return" of illegal immigrants. The articles you posted links to mostly criticise the rhetoric leaning towards the Return Flights stuff. I can see the sense in their policy, and agree that they should be emphasising the more positive aspects, but it doesn't read to me like they are demonising all immigrants as a whole
If you two expended as much effort into explaining what you actually did mean when asked, as you are expending in squawking about how misunderstood you are, we’d have put this spat to bed several pages back.
As it stands you should probably be grateful that the Report links aren’t working.
Presumably that is not aimed at me?
Oh, on closer reading it is aimed at me in part.
Right-o.
I'm out.
We all know the answer to this is to properly reform the asylum system and improve people’s lives, neither of which are easy or quick. The vandalism of the previous government didn’t just stop at running the immigration service into the ground, they also tore up most of our established treaties and agreements with our partners through the travesty of Brexit.
All of this. It's fair comment to discuss our expectations and hopes, but the tone has been very "blamey". This is only one of several disasters the new government has inherited and has to resolve.
6 weeks in power and all the countries ills aren’t fixed yet
The bloody charlatan!
If only he had a beard and an allotment
I like a bit of humour in these threads if it helps, but sometimes just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Oh, on closer reading it is aimed at me in part.
FWIW I'm inclined to agree with you. But should a moderator step in, I would expect the outcome would be either to give you both a few days off to calm down - ie, not picking sides - or to close the thread. It doesn't really matter who's "right" in these instances, the mods have better things to do than wade back through half a dozen or more pages to see who started it.
Why does Labour’s policy seem to be to appease them?
Because for the folks that will have voted Labour; polling and focus groups show that generally immigration and migration aren't high up on their list of worries, so they aren't going to make changes to theses areas as nominally these folks aren't bothered anyway. The folks that do worry about will want to see 'strong' measures; returning migrants that have failed processing, attracting well qualified immigrants, strengthening education and opportunities in local communities for existing populations , stopping the small boat crossing which Labour have said they'll continue to do do, and shouldn't be massively controversial anyway.
Plus the ONS think that overall, migration levels will fall in the next few years, I would imagine that Labour are betting that consequently it will fall lower and lower in the news.
We all know the answer to this is to properly reform the asylum system and improve people’s lives, neither of which are easy or quick. The vandalism of the previous government didn’t just stop at running the immigration service into the ground, they also tore up most of our established treaties and agreements with our partners through the travesty of Brexit.
I think if labour can sort out the hospital waiting list and access to doctors then people won’t be fixated on the boats/immigration thing that they were never interested in until it got forced down their throats by the usual suspects.
@dudeofdoom, yes, plus other measures like action to increase employment opportunities, adult education, better hosing and so on. There's always going to be a subclass of racists for whom none of this will make a difference to their views and aren't paying attention to traditional political messaging and/ore mainstream news anyway. It's never been more easy to opt out of the same world that rest of us inhabit.
If the plan is to sort the backlog of asylum claimants, and in future have a fast and humane process in place for claims... than it will mean a rise in people who have their claim fail, despite the vast majority of claims being successful. So... there needs to be increased provision of staff and accommodation for dealing with those that fail in their asylum claim. It's almost like joined up government...
FWIW I’m inclined to agree with you. But should a moderator step in, I would expect the outcome would be either to give you both a few days off to calm down – ie, not picking sides – or to close the thread. It doesn’t really matter who’s “right” in these instances, the mods have better things to do than wade back through half a dozen or more pages to see who started it.
Point taken.
I'm out of this one now in any case.
It’s almost like joined up government…
There's radical thinking and then there's the stuff of myths and fairy tales!
The standard of hoses hasn’t been the same since Henry VIII
Indeed, bring back stockings for men!
Everyone on this thread has you nailed for what you are.
You can’t undo that, ever
yawn
I’m out
For the third and (hopefully) final time?
Edit, hadn’t made it to the fourth repetition yet
I’m out of this one now in any case.
Because for the folks that will have voted Labour; polling and focus groups show that generally immigration and migration aren’t high up on their list of worries
Yep, health and housing are the biggies, immigration and asylum isn't really on many minds, bar the right wingers who want to stop it all, people want to know they have a future to look forward too, and immigration doesn't really come into it that much.
As for the query i've raised a few times, about what this new 'safe route' is, i honestly have no clue what is being proposed, the UK safe asylum routes i believe are the same and as robust as the EU and others, the deaths of migrants trying to cross dangerous routes isn't just the channel, it's across the seas between Europe and Africa, and the med, why aren't more nations having a joined up approach to managing this issue?
I think if labour can sort out the hospital waiting list and access to doctors then people won’t be fixated on the boats/immigration thing that they were never interested in until it got forced down their throats by the usual suspects.
I very much agree with this except that the boats/immigration never became the huge issue which Patel, Braverman, Sunak, and the rest of the Tory right-wing, had hoped it would become.
Otherwise Labour would not have won a landslide.
As for the query i’ve raised a few times, about what this new ‘safe route’ is, i honestly have no clue what is being proposed
AIUI it is the same as the existing safe routes, but new (no, really) i.e. that asylum seekers would have their claim assessed at some place closer to their starting point and if successful would then travel legally to the UK.
How hilarious
That is effectively what this thread has morphed into
The new Govt (who I love/despise/tolerate) aren't doing what I want as quickly as I want it done, woe is me. How dare you challenge my opinion?
This constant drip drip of court cases being reported on a day-to-day basis is brilliant because it basically involves the character assassinations of the individuals concerned.
Their pathetic personal stories and the fact that they are almost all pleading guilty, and expressing deep remorse, is further publicly emphasising what sort of people back Stephen Lennon and Nigel Farage.
I can't imagine that the rioting and the aftermath, as it drags on, has done anything other than damage Stephen Lennon and the far-right. For years Nick Griffin tried to cultivate this image that the far-right were respectable and law-abiding, accumulating with his appearance on BBC QT, in much the same way as the far-right have done in France. It obviously failed and these recent riots have simply reemphasized the thuggery of the racist far-right.
Unfortunately I believe that the opportunity to seriously tarnish Nigel Farage has been missed, he seems to have fairly successfully slid under a stone and will presumably resurface reasonably untainted when things calm down.
I think the photo in this article is brilliant. It should become an iconic one to represent the riots:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20718gdwj6o
What would happen if the people in court said I joined the protest as I heard about it on social media and directly mentioned Farage or SYL encouraging them?
As for the query i’ve raised a few times, about what this new ‘safe route’ is, i honestly have no clue what is being proposed, the UK safe asylum routes i believe are the same and as robust as the EU and others, the deaths of migrants trying to cross dangerous routes
Firstly I am not sure saying as good as the EU etc is really a good selling point and secondly you seem to be mixing up safe asylum route (as in the legal process) with physical routes for illegal migrants.
What would happen if the people in court said I joined the protest as I heard about it on social media and directly mentioned Farage or SYL encouraging them?
I would say that they had received poor legal advice. They seem to have mostly claimed that it was spur of the moment madness and not premeditated.
Typically they have claimed something along the lines of having popped out to do a spot of shopping or a quick drink with some mates when they came to the scene of a riot and simply got carried away with the moment.
"I've never done anything like that before your honour, honest. Apart from the 15 previous convictions for violence related crimes"
attracting well qualified immigrants
I wonder how seeing those riots has affected those who might have wanted to come here to set up in business or take up qualified positions.
When you see that there is a rise in far right, and a fascist 'political' party making it into Parliament, would they then consider Britain to be a bad choice to emigrate to
“I’ve never done anything like that before your honour, honest. Apart from the 15 previous convictions for violence related crimes”
I particularly liked the one who took a knuckleduster because “He was scared it could be violent, he only went out of curiosity.”
Yeah because everyone keeps an illegal knuckleduster or two handy.
I wonder how seeing those riots has affected those who might have wanted to come here to set up in business or take up qualified positions.
When you see that there is a rise in far right, and a fascist ‘political’ party making it into Parliament, would they then consider Britain to be a bad choice to emigrate to
Alternatively, you could come to the conclusion that the average Briton is such a shit thick, clearly unemployable ****-wit that with your skill set you could make an absolute killing?
Bingo!!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8x5x51l3vo
He missed out the ECHR but pretty much has everything else covered... Didn't attend his English lessons much at school mind you but who am I to criticise, I'm hardly Shakespeare. 😀
Firstly I am not sure saying as good as the EU etc is really a good selling point and secondly you seem to be mixing up safe asylum route (as in the legal process) with physical routes for illegal migrants.
Wasn't mixing them up, i listed on the previous page the safe routes i believe the UK has, which are similar, if not exact with EU nations like Italy, France, etc.
The physical route thing was how do we stop that occurring, as those who fail will continue, i believe 20% of those crossing the channel are from Albania, so no chance of asylum, same with several others trying to cross, so stopping the flow of people trying to get into the UK (and Italy/Greece/etc) doesn't appear to have a way of stopping, unless nations allow free movement for certain countries as well, but again, not sure anyone would sign up for that?
Maybe if we were an EU member state we could work with them as they are on our doorstep to resolve it.
Rejoin to EU to help stop illegal immigration.
i believe 20% of those crossing the channel are from Albania, so no chance of asylum
No the 20% was in the summer of 2022, I believe that there were just 15 individuals from Albania in the first quarter of this year.
And yes they stand a good chance of being granted asylum, especially women and children. From Nov 2022:
Although very few of the recent small boat arrivals will have had their asylum application considered at this point, we know that Albanians more generally had been less likely to be granted asylum than other nationalities with the current grant rate 53% compared to 76% for all nationalities.
I think the Govt needs to watch that Liam Neesom documentary "Taken"
"Get down now. I can see your legs."
I guess he thought that if he didn't answer the door the police would simply just go away.
Rioter found hiding in loft jailed over Rotherham disorder
https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2024-08-22/i-can-see-your-legs-rioter-found-hiding-in-loft-jailed
Has there ever been a more protracted and public display of the staggering level of stupidity of those who idolise Stephen Lennon than the reporting of recent court hearings?
It’s all been downhill since that bloke got a brick on his bonce, then another in his cobblers
I mean, there’s been some blinding acts of stupidity since, but nobody has come close to him deciding to show what would happen if Frank Spencer started a riot
Lets just take a minute to once again savour that beautiful moment…
That guy hiding in the loft Ernie posted a link to.
He's 27, 27!!
Going full fat, full fasc must lead to accelerated decrepitude or something?
Every time I see that clip I still chuckle despite knowing exactly what to expect. It never seems to lose its comedy value.
He’s 27, 27!!
And he has 13 previous convictions.
His job description is "chicken catcher". I had no idea there was such a thing as professional chicken catcher, I had to Google it
The one thing most of these rioters seem to share is a previous criminal record.
The one thing most of these rioters seem to share is a previous criminal record.
Yep, don't hear of many that don't but anyone that was totally clean beforehand could possibly claim they "got caught up in the event" whereas with so many previous convictions they probably joined in for a laugh, got a bit of active racism in and thought as a massive crowd they would simply get away with it.
I know you shouldn't judge a book by the cover but do any of the people look anything but what we now know they are?
It’s all been downhill since that bloke got a brick on his bonce, then another in his cobblers
Because he's the hero the UK deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. Groiny McBrickface
This article is mostly about the conspiracy grand-dad, but this caught my eye;
Cassius Adamson, 19, joined an anti-immigration march on 3 August and was involved in clashes with the police, including outside the Mercure hotel.Bristol crown court heard the labourer had joined the protest after drinking two litres of spirits and taking MDMA, ketamine and cocaine earlier in the day.
How is he still upright after all that, let alone able to take part in a riot?
How is he still upright after all that, let alone able to take part in a riot?
Some people think that a Court will take insensibility as a defence
There are actually quite a few rioters with no previous convictions. What they seem to have in common is that they mostly seem to have attended the riots out of curiosity and had no intention of rioting. Several have cried in court. Liam Gray seems quite typical, although this report doesn't mention that he cried in court :
Mr Moss said his client wanted to make it clear “there isn’t racist bone in his body”.
But the Recorder of Sheffield, Judge Jeremy Richardson KC, responded: “If that’s true, what on earth was he doing?”
Mr Moss said: “That is the imponderable question.”
He said Gray simply went to the scene because he was curious.
Judge Richardson said: “Almost every defendant who had appeared in this court, of which there have been many, has indicated curiosity as being the reason they went to this episode.”
Another one who has cried in court is this geezer who someone appears to have scribbled graffiti on his forehead:
But probably the one thing they all have the most in common is their guilty pleas in court. None appear to want to take a stand and use their court appearances as an opportunity to proudly declare their commitment British values which they believe are threatened by hordes of invading Muslims, and other immigrants.
Even conspiracy grandad who went to all the trouble of producing a placard denouncing the corruption of everything, including the judicial system, condemned himself by pleading guilty. Which of course begs the question whether he is also part of the conspiracy?
as an opportunity to proudly declare their commitment British values which they believe are threatened by hordes of invading Muslims, and other immigrants.
Because these idiots are mostly idiots and don't have a clue? I doubt any of them could articulate a coherent grievance, other than the usual nonsense of "get given houses" or "comin' over 'ere and takin' our jobs" which they may or may not actual believe is true. After 2 litres of vodka and all those drugs, I'm guessing Cassius up there just wanted a punch up with the cops to round of the day's entertainment.
Surely they all fail the first ‘common sense’ test?
If there’s a situation that involves half-knackers being lobbed about with gay abandon, cars getting torched, all with tones of overt racism and the police turning up in their hundreds in riot gear, then surely every human instinct is to get the **** out of there? Not least in case you may unwittingly become the next brick/cobblers interface bloke?
The one thing most of these rioters seem to share is a previous criminal record.
These are the ones pleading guilty though vs holding out for a trial in the hope they will come up with an excuse and get off.
Something that someone without a criminal record is more likely to try I think. The thought of prison is going to be more concerning for someone who hasnt been in there every other year to date and thats without thinking about the cv problem. Something the chicken catcher is well past.
There is that tory councillors wife for example who had her hearing delayed due to her lawyers asking for a mental health assessment.
I’m quite concerned about the inherently contradictory nature of his drug use. Who takes MDMA then goes looking for a ruck? Most people just want a big hug
Surely they all fail the first ‘common sense’ test?
I was talking to a mate at the trade union club last night and as I told him about how the chicken catcher got caught hiding in his loft he had to patiently wait until my laughter subsided and I regained my composure before I could complete the story.
But what left me breathless with laughter was trying to tell him the story of the geezer who got caught because he had his name printed on the back of his tee shirt 🙂
i listed on the previous page the safe routes i believe the UK has
there are no real safe routes to claim asylum in the UK
also we have a large cohort of asylum seekers who can NOT be processed leagally nor legally returned. they are in indefinite limbo. arrive irregularly then under they tory laws you cannot claim asylum. But neither can they be deported so they just sit in limbo
there are no real safe routes to claim asylum in the UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/illegal-migration-bill-factsheets/safe-and-legal-routes
Back to the rioters now, good to see the prison sentences rolling on, with the overcrowding issues and the previous weeks promise regarding prisons, it could've been possible to have a lot of light sentences, but this is a proper round em up and throw them in prison exercise, must be nice for the police who were on riot duty to go around the houses and get those who thought they were invulnerable a week previous.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/illegal-migration-bill-factsheets/safe-and-legal-routes
/blockquote>
That was published when Suella Braverman was Home Secretary. You need to accept Suella Braverman's and Rishi Sunak's narrative concerning people arriving on small boats if you believe the claims it makes.Do you argee? You should say so if you do.