Absolutely appalling. I think it's been clear for a long time (admittedly I usually only become aware of it through football) that many Eastern European Nations have a racist attitude, reminiscent of here in the 70s. Disgusting. Not trying to open up an argument again, but I'm not sure any of that racism justifies what Putin is doing.
There are certainly backward views on race in Eastern Europe, as you say. I'd say more like USA in the 50's and 60's. Ukraine moving toward the West can only lead to enlightenment. I wonder how many black people would enjoy life in Putin's Russia...if they were let in.
I didn’t have a bet! I don’t gamble. Besides you don’t know that comrade Jezza didn’t phone Putin? It’s the sort of thing he would do.
But you said "I bet" in your post Ellers. Now you say you don't bet!!!!! You said "I bet Jezza is in the Kremlin".. Now you say ( quite rightly) that I don't know he didn't phone...which I don't but that wasn't the bet I still think you owe me a pint
Okay if you are going to be pedantic… for a bet you need both parties to agree. I never mentioned or agreed to anything. You can’t be that desperate for a drink Beth. Blimey it’s Tuesday morning!
Actually I know that...and likewise. It would be really great to one day. I am trying to lighten the mood here a bit ....
Amnesty International reporting that Putin will be investigated for war crimes after children are shot dead and banned cluster bombs are used on a school.
Priti Vacant really stepping up...... Let’s be generous to Priti Patel. She’s by far the dimmest member of the cabinet – a low water mark in a confederacy of dunces – so it’s possible no one has told her that Boris Johnson has changed his mind on Ukraine from his 2016 assessment of Russia’s invasion of Crimea, which he blamed on the EU. So she may think she is doing the government a favour in blocking the flow of Ukrainian refugees to the UK. There again, the home secretary is also vicious, so she may just enjoy the sight of hundreds of thousands of women and children seeking sanctuary. Either way, Priti Vacant isn’t having a good war. While the rest of the country sees a homeless population trying to avoid a war zone, she just sees people who are somehow looking to take advantage of the UK. The home secretary has never seen a refugee she really trusted to go back home when it was safe. At least, that’s the appearance she gave in the Commons on Monday afternoon. By any normal standards, Patel ought to have been giving a ministerial statement on the government’s handling of the refugee crisis; but instead she merely gave the Commons a quick heads up during Home Office departmental questions. Mainly, presumably, because she didn’t feel she had a lot to say. The EU might have decided to temporarily waive visa requirements for Ukrainian refugees, but the UK most definitely would not be following suit. There was far too much chance of us taking the wrong kind of refugee. People who could have been better accommodated by other European countries. Criminals with fixed penalty notices for breaking lockdown rules. Russians masquerading as Ukrainians. Or “the” Ukrainians. Patel insisted on calling Ukraine “the Ukraine”. It was all very confusing. Patel was adamant that the visa requirements were being made more generous, only for her to contradict herself by saying that the new rules would only let in people with immediate family in the UK. She didn’t sound at all pleased to be allowing up to 100,000 of the Ukrainians into the country. Not even the thought that other European countries were taking in significantly more people could cheer her up. The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, tried to make sense of the muddle. So were we making it easier for refugees to get into the UK or not, she asked. Because it wasn’t at all clear from what Patel had said so far. Vacant looked vacant and did what she always does when she’s on the back foot. She snapped and got angry. She had said all that needed to be said, and if no one had quite understood everything then it was their fault. She couldn’t be blamed if no one could quite keep up with her. Had it been a ministerial statement, there’s a fair chance that Patel would have come under pressure from many MPs on her own side who are upset by the UK’s lack of generosity to refugees. They want their government to walk the walk as well as talk the talk. But given that it was just departmental questions, there was no time for anyone to interrogate the home secretary’s thinking. Though they may get a chance on Tuesday as the Speaker made it plain he was dissatisfied at Patel trying to stifle debate and would be happy to grant an urgent question the following day. Still, Patel wasn’t the only one getting it in the neck. Earlier in the session, the shadow junior Home Office minister Stephen Kinnock had asked Kevin Foster, his opposite number, to unreservedly apologise for his tweet suggesting that Ukrainians could come to this country via the seasonal workers visa. If Foster had had a shred of dignity he could have just said he had been off his head when he had tweeted on Sunday. Instead he doubled down. He wasn’t going to apologise – though curiously he had deleted the tweet – and many Ukrainians had been in touch with him to say how grateful they were to be offered the opportunity to pick fruit at some point in the future. So Labour should just learn to get with the programme. Foster is nothing if not loyal to his boss. Though he may just be as half-witted. Vacant and vicious: Priti Patel’s tone-deaf problem with Ukraine refugees | John Crace | The Guardian
The joke about that is the person being tried for the crimes has to be present at the hearing, they can't be tried in absentia !
