I’m not a fan of political correctness, but I’m not a fan of racial stereotyping either. Stating that there is a real issue with knife crime and that the main protagonists are black is a statement of fact in London and other inner cities. It’s equally true that the victims are largely black. My opinion is you need to be free to say that to help address the problem and fear of offence or being labelled racist can be detrimental to addressing the problem. However, the problem is statements get highjacked to imply that it’s a ‘black’ problem, Like black boys have a pre-disposition to knife crime... as opposed to there being a disenfranchised, social, poverty element to drug gangs being able to arm kids with knives to kill each other. Chucking refugees/immigrants with no money and no hope into inner city areas is not going to improve knife crimes stats. Years of government policy and policing under successive governments from both parties are responsible. For example there appears to be a correlation between stop and searches and knife crime... stop and search is contentious, it takes police time/money and is not ’PC’. Asian/Muslim grooming gangs. This is a harrowing but interesting read. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....e-girls-religious-extremism-a8261831.html?amp The people that commit the crimes are scum and actions need to be taken to stop them. However, as I understand it Asians are underrepresented In child abuse convictions across the board. A very small proportion of Asian males being involved in grooming gangs, isn’t a justification to bash all Muslims, it’s a justification to bash the perpetrators. So we need to stop giving in to the pc brigade and front up to the issues AND stop/educate the misinformation, abuse of information, lack of context that increases negative stereotypes that Blacks do this, Muslims do this. Because that fuels hate crime and is counter-productive.
There are levels of interference depending on strength of comment and timing, but Trump shouldn’t interfere, Obama shouldn’t interfere, tusk shouldn’t interfere, Clinton shouldn’t interfere
A gun on its own is harmless, it needs a person to pull the trigger to kill someone. If that person is a total nut job who has inexplicably been granted a gun licence because of the US’s lax gun controls then that’s where the problems arise.
And the person cant pull the trigger if he doesn’t have access to a gun. Lax licence controls are inevitable with the volume of guns in circulation. How do you check whether any of millions of people have been acting a little strange recently? Greater the volume of guns, easier it is for nut job to get hold of one. Easier it is for people to justify they need one for self defence if everyone else has them. Fine in wyatt earp’s day as a constitutional right but bollox in the 21st century.
It would be nice to throw a few snowflakes around though Preferably off the top of a very tall building
So much for the workers party, hope corbyn pays the ultimate price for how many people he has put out of work today.
It will be interesting to see how much Trump doesn't interfere when he is in the UK 3-4 Dec 2019 and to be fair the other leaders should try not to pass comment one way or the other either.
OLOF, just watching Newsnight and I saw Alf Hooker in the audience clapping Ed Davey today in Leeds. What a fecking liberal snowflake. He'll be trying to get into Jo Swinson's knickers next.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...broadband-plan-and-part-nationalisation-of-bt Even the Guardian can't see how this will work. Those of you not old enough to remember when our services were nationalised previously, it was ****.
State ownership is a temporary step in the process that transitions the means of production (wealth making) from capitalistic to common ownership. To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service. Nice in theory but nobody in the ownership structure is out to make money, reduce costs and increase efficiency, so it stagnates.
As opposed to today where 8% of the country has access to high speed fibre broadband compared to over 70% in such communist hell holes as Spain, Sweden, South Korea, Japan... The Tory alternative is let markets do the profitable urban areas and then let government pay for the unprofitable rural areas. Why? It’s like the banks overall again with socialised capitalism. You take all the profits and tax payer cover all the losses. We’ll only have competition over the providers and have a monopoly of infrastructure. So it makes sense to do the infrastructure by government as it’s then it’s done properly and cheaper. We’re already playing catch up because of this mistake https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost-the-broadband-race-in-1990-1224784
nah we’ll just use this one instead https://www.cityam.com/gove-says-government-will-spend-whatever-it-takes-to-prepare-for-no-deal/
You do know we have now agreed a deal don't you ? It was just a ploy to bring the EU back to renegotiation, and it worked. Or you saying Corbyn's is just a ploy as well, and they have no intention of doing any of it.
I do know that Theresa May looked a nurse in the eye at the last election and spend their was no magic money tree, before weeks later spunking a billion on the DUP (that ended well). I do know the Tories spent 100 million on a No Deal advertising campaign, 15 million for a ferry company that had no ferries. I also remember them saying we were all in it together before imposing austerity, increasing the debt to record levels, cutting top rate taxes and corporation tax and then stopping austerity as it blatantly didn’t work. But yep there's no magic money tree for you because you’re not rich but don’t worry this time they’re not lying to you...