https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...t-letter-special-counsel-jack-smith-rcna92691 Trump has been informed that he's very likely to be charged with even more felonies, biglier and better felonies than ever before, some are saying they're the most beautiful felonies they've ever seen.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...coutts-bank-account-closed-align-with-values/ Proof that they de-banked Farafe for political reasons. Then lied about it. Report states that his account was commercially viable. This is absolutely shocking, even if you hate Farage. Facism
A private company is entitled to choose who they supply, just as we're entitled to choose what suppliers we use. I'm sure Farage is very happy to boycott 'woke' companies... So why should they not be able to boycott him?
Are you being serious? Debanking and deplatforming someone because you don’t like their views is disgusting and frankly very serious. If you disagree with someone, you beat them soundly with reasoning. That’s the foundation of democracy. It’s funny to me how so many left wing people reveal that they are happy with authoritarian rule as soon as they disagree with someone.
The question could be flipped. Why are you so happy to fight the corner of so many repugnant people just because they sit on the right? You have jumped on this story within 20 minutes of it hitting the press. Sky are still reporting these as Farage’s claims. The Telegraph is the worst toilet paper out there - and behind a paywall. The big question here is - Did Farage have the £3M? All he has to do is show his bank account balance. Which he has not done. If he did not, we are being asked a wholly different question from the one you want us to see: Was the bank being asked to keep him on despite not having the due funds? In which case a report on how that would look for the bank seems ok.
Because I care about truth, justice & democracy no matter who the person is being persecuted. I think it’s a bad sign that people on here are so willing to persecute political opponents. First the freedom truckers when I mentioned that, now farage. It seems that people that claim to be tolerant are actually nothing of the sort as they advocate silencing political opponents.
No one persecuted the bloody freedom truckers. Several of them had a cache of guns and were planning to kill police officers to start a race war, which as you might expect prompted a bit of a police and government reaction, but that is probably just a conspiracy against them because Os cares deeply only about truth as it conforms with his own preferred worldview. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_alleged_plot_to_kill_Coutts_RCMP_officer
The post above literally used the bullshit argument “they are a private company they can do what they like”. The ability to silence, deplatform & de-monetise people because of political opinions is completely wrong. I see the EU is passing a law to enforce social media blackouts during protests. We are on a slippery slope to technlogy based authoritarianism in my opinion. You may think it’s fine now, because you don’t like Farage. But what about when they use these powers on a protest you do agree with?
Is this the law which seeks to impose social media blackouts during protests? If not links to verifiable sources please. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/22/technology/european-union-social-media-law.html Or this which discusses where blackouts have and may take place in the future. Also what steps governments and individuals can do to circumvent authoritarian controls. https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/...ld-citizens-and-democracies-respond-pub-86687
Not.sure that it would but if a hung parliament with Labour the largest party in a coalition that would have closer ties to the EU and electoral reform at the fore I'd be happy with that. A commitment to ending the fifteen year rule for overseas voters is also high on my list.
It’ll take decades for us to rejoin the EU, but we can begin the process of greater alignment pretty much immediately. As for Starmer, I certainly have reservations; my views are close to Jeremy Corbyn’s on a whole range of issues. But I’ll judge a Starmer government after 5 years in power, and I won’t be able to do that, unless they win power.
Let's include reformation of the unelected HoL in the list along with recinding any attempts at curtailing the independence of the judiciary. A commitment to hounding down the corrupt covid fraudsters and the granting of full access and judicial powers to the covid inquiry should get on the manifestos to.
In a perfect world (OK, my idea of perfect), after the next General Election, Labour would be the largest party, with the Liberals/Liberal Democrats holding sway. This would then require Labour to support a change to the election system, to use Proportional Representation, as opposed to 'First Past the Post', so that subsequent parliaments would not be dominated by one or other party, and a degree of reasonableness in government would ensue. I think I'll change my name to Pollyanna
My inclination is to agree with you on Farage, but then I thought about it in a different context. If I was applying to be, or was a member of an exclusive private club in London (which is essentially what Coutts is), then would I expect them to check me out, including social media, and make an informed decision off the back of that whether or not they would accept me in? Yes, I would. If it was your regular high street bank, less so, but Coutts is a very exclusive, and very unique case. As a more general point though, yes, it's uncomfortable that there's a slightly disturbing creep toward this kind of thing though - be it the baker refusing the same sex cake, or something with a greater outreach. I'm just not sure that this case is it.
