horsefly

Nah! He said "great" career, not a mediocre career that disappeared in a blaze of far-right buffoonery.

Even David Cameron admitted in an interview that Brexit had ruined the best opportunity we had for dealing with boat arrivals. The Dublin III regulation allowed us to return immediately anyone who turned up on our shores from whence they arrived. Brexit brought the Dublin III regulation to an end.

The Australian navy have faced serious accusations of driving boats out to sea and letting them sink. As for the asylum seekers offshored, it is done under appalling conditions on an island at a cost of more than $2m per person. None of the aspects of the Australian execution of their system would ever be acceptable to the UK.

It's interesting how few are the people who actually know anything about the Glorious Revolution. Yet it seems to me it is probably of the first importance in understanding the constitutional arrangement between the power of the head of state and parliament. Arguably, it is precisely because of the GR that the monarchy has survived to this very day. By accepting the authority of parliament over their own "sovereignty" William and Mary gave the monarchy a degree of legitimacy that remains to this day the only real argument for preserving with a monarch as head of state.

Weren't they supposed to be there CELEBRATING St George's day?

Try this if you want something a little different

The Ubermensch in court today 🤣

That's a shame. Fingers crossed for the remaining one.

Irish Republicanism is non-sectarian. Wolfe Tone, the most iconic of all republicans (still celebrated every year in the movement), was a protestant.

Did any of them attend a private party in a foreign country, say Italy for example, thrown by a chief spy of an enemy nation?

Slay dragons. That's why Truss, Patel, and Braverman have gone into hiding.

I would have done but posted my message calling you an idiot on the wrong thread.

LDI markets have been a source of concern and scandal for a long time (see the many articles in Private Eye). But I refuse to let that distract from the fact that Liz Truss is entirely to blame for pursuing her pig-headed, ideologically insane budget. Like Trump when he became president she rid herself of, or ignored, ANY advisor she considered would provide resistance to her objectives, and listened only to feeble-willed sycophants applauding her on. A perfect example of the moral of The Emperor's New Clothes.

Anyone seen sight of Fatty Bacon lately? I note he has not made a single contribution in parliament in 2024, so I can only assume he must be earning his taxpayer funded dollars working extra hard in the constituency. For some reason I just can't find any evidence.

Truss made it very clear at the time that she would not listen to the OBR or the BOE. She has also subsequently reaffirmed that attitude by calling for the abolition of the OBR and the sacking of the BOE head. She was the ultimate authority, and she made it clear that she didn't want to listen to what any other body had to say. Her astonishing arrogance was evident at the time, only to be surpassed by her utterly self-delusional account of her calamitous reign in her pi*ss-poor book.

Trump in court. Caught in the twilight zone of a senile old codger's sleepy-time, and the haze of his own toxic fart cloud

Indeed! Sadly by the time Biden had taken over there US forces were reduced so low there wasn't the remotest chance of preventing a messy exit. At least he delayed withdrawal from the original May date that Trump had guaranteed, giving a few more Afghanis extra time to escape. It was still a very awful episode in US history. What isn't in question is that it was Trump's shameful "America First" unconditional surrender to the Taliban that caused this debacle.

It's pretty much what is built in to his "America First" policy. Hence his complete surrender to the Taliban when he negotiated the unconditional withdrawal of all US forces with the Taliban leadership, without a single member of the Afghan government or NATO allies being involved or consulted. As Full Fact have confirmed:

Oh dear! The misogyny is written in the BIBLE, ffs!. The BIBLE is THE authoritative text for the Christian religion. Try actually reading the "Rules for Priests" in Leviticus. You will find instructions for denying menstruating woman access to church because of their impurity. You will find women being described as a threat of contamination. You will find instructions calling for adulterous women to be stoned to death, etc, etc, etc. These religiously inspired misogynist attitudes have contaminated societal attitudes for ALL the succeeding centuries. And you only have to look at the USA to see that they are on the rise again. Evangelists throughout the US are securing draconian restrictions on women's rights. Their arguments are ENTIRELY based on their religious beliefs. Misogyny can take many forms, not all of which are religious, but it is utterly absurd to deny that religion is major source of misogynist attitudes. As for this absurd an unintelligible comment: "it's unhelpful to women to insist on bundling in misogyny with religion; that's the whole reason we have misguided lefties acting as apologists for misogyny in Islam by declaring criticism as 'Islamophobic'," Firstly, it makes no sense. Secondly, find me a "leftie" who says misogyny is OK as long as it happens within Islamic culture. As is common in your posts you're simply making up totally nonsensical positions that no one holds in a ridiculous attempt to lend your own views some plausibility. It doesn't work.

Sorry old boy! I have absolutely no idea how that could have happened as the quote was taken straight from LYB's response to you (see above). I really can't explain how the system then attributed it to you as I certainly didn't. Would you like me to delete it so people don't get confused?

It is often impossible to disentangle the motives. For example, it may be true that a fight over resources motivates conflict, but often that is because the proclaimed right to those resources is based on religious claims that the land concerned was promised to them by God. You can certainly add a few more wars to the Crusades as being fundamentally religious in motivation, not the least of which have involved the Taliban in Afghanistan.

I take it you haven't read the Bible or Koran then. Perhaps start with Leviticus and then return to tell me that misogyny and mistreatment of women is a "bolt on" rather than core to the religious doctrines.

Of course, no one has ever heard of a single case of a gay child being psychologically damaged by religious conversion therapy. Nor a gay person being beaten up, imprisoned, or sentenced to death in countries run by religious zealots. FFS!

The real threat of censorship captured in John Simpson's tweet. The extremely wealthy far right: https://x.com/JohnSimpsonNews/status/1780639200401879412

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1780853153480479132.html?utm_campaign=topunroll