CornwallFox

Pentagon declares Anthropic a threat to national security - The Washington Post https://share.google/NroY2beGFOwbRPED6 The need with this one is that Anthropic have an AI system that looks to be a really big deal for the company, with rumours it's used internally within Microsoft over it's own co-pilot. The US military wants to use ours AI to power military hardware but Anthropic have resisted, so in typical Trumpiam fashion, the department of war are now attempting to make their AI system unusable across America, another do what we say or else type approach.

It's not about the flag, this is what you're missing. What you're describing is patriotism. Simply being proud of your country is patriotism. Nobody cares about people loving their country and flying it's flag and other symbols as patriotism. What we often see, however, is England flags flown by groups that are nationalistic rather than patriotic. The sentiment of their nationalism is what is disliked. You are yourself saying you disagree with nationalism. The flag when used by those groups as a symbol of their beliefs is where flag waving gets brought into focus. Britain first, the national front, BNP, Tommy Robinson and other groups over the years have caused flag waving to be linked to nationalism, rather than patriotism which exists on left and right. You should be angry about them misusing the symbol of our country as much as anybody else. The flag itself though has no meaning beyond being a symbol of the country so having it displayed is fine. It's about motive and motivation. The fact right wing patriots pretend this distinction doesn't exist is a bit ridiculous.

I live on planet earth....

That might be the worst goal I've ever seen us concede in 35+ years of watching us. Why do we have 11 on the edge of our own area. Why are we letting them wander 20 years down the pitch untouched. Nobody going wide. Nobody defending the centre. Worst concession ever.

Why are we letting Ricardo wander into midfield when he doesn't have the legs to get back any more?

At least the Stol's having a good game in goal

We've got a defence with two non forward running midfielders ahead then four players ahead of that. Of those 4 players, 2 are good, 1 is thr worst striker in the club's history, the other is a slow, old player playing on the wing. It's not much surprise we're 0-0

I'm going to circle back to conversations we've had about where you fit politically. For the record, when I tease you about it I see it as teasing, there's nothing malicious in it. It may be that you've been centre left in the past but you really aren't now. It's not that politics has moved left, it really, really hasn't, hence immigration and reform being constants on TV and political discourse now, but in recent days you've made a number of comments that are in line with, variously, reform, GB news, and Tommy Robinson. It's you that has moved rightwards. Discussion of the union jack as racist is 95% within right wing channels. It's a really boring trope trotted out endlessly about how you can't say you're English any more (good Stewart Lee piece on that), can't fly the flag, can't tell jokes etc. It's simply untrue. People have been putting up the flag for the last 28 months without anybody giving a stuff. Where comments are made by people like me, it's now because we think it's pathetic anybody believes this guff and feels it necessary to fly the flag to make a point, when none of us care about the flag flying. I would much rather they looked good like flags down the mall or Oxford Street than badly put up on lamposts, but that's my only real observation. It's all right wing victim mentality stuff that I thinks a bit pathetic really.

JJ on for either winks or skipp, mavididi on the left, push players forward, push Norwich back

Norwich just have do much more verve and ingenuity than us this half. We really lack fluidity and speed of thought and foot. We're a bunch of slow journeymen in comparison.

Elements of the illegal migration act 2023 that banned migrants entering the UK irregularly from claiming asylum were never enforced and are in the process of being repealed. To claim asylum an immigrant simply have to tell a border force officer that is their intention. So in reality what you're saying isn't true. For the record, the new laws Labour are seeking to enact look to Denmark as inspiration, a country where asylum claims are currently at a 40 year low.

I suppose this is where political parties are flawed. Let's be honest, we live in a world where everybody tries to back up their liking for a particular party by claiming everything they do is right, and nothing is wrong. Nobody admits any flaws in their world views any more. Reality is that political parties have memberships and voters that cover a spectrum of people. Their overall world view is likely to be similar, hence them feeling able to come together. But within that there will also be many differences in outlooks on individual policies. And at times that will mean diametric opposition to each other within a party. We pretend this is a party failure but it's simply human nature. We group ourselves together with those we feel we have commonalities with, but then argue and squabble within those groups. There's no policy on the left which directly benefits Islam above anything else, so clearly if Islamic peoples (as many other originally immigrant groups) are voting left wing it's because they feel those parties more broadly share an outlook.

Islamic ideology is for the most part peace and love. Maybe the divide is really just on how much we believe Islam is a force for ill or don't believe it is (not the same as believing it's a force for good, as I'd rather we had no religions).

Fair enough re your position politically. That is a good point re the inherent conservatism of most religious groups, but I'm not sure how much that lines up with political conservatism. Let's be honest, the number of active Christians in this country is tiny - not just those who claim to be Christian while doing and saying nothing Christian, but those who actively go to a church to celebrate their religion, I'm not even sure which part of the electorate you'd line them up with. There's certainly nothing Christian about the current right wing leaders, reform, who are the party that are currently most trying to link politics to a supposed Christian state of Britain. Whereas the left wing parties tend to adopt positions and policies more in keeping with the messages of key religions - they're more peace and love I suppose.

It's not for me to determine where you sit politically though I would suggest right of lib dem and left of current Tories would maybe a soft traditional centre right Tory land? It's definitely true left wing parties get more votes from all former immigrant communities generally. Might that be more to do with the historic wrongs of right wing parties, and the general anti immigrant mindset of a big part of the right wing electorate? Left wing policies tend to aim to treat everybody more fairly, whereas right wing policies tend to aim to penalise. Maybe I'm wrong with that but I don't really see a love in particularly.

They aren't here illegally, no matter how many times you say it. The supreme court has confirmed that position. Until their asylum claims are processed they are here. If they are not granted asylum and fail any appeals then they can be removed. The issue is that the Tories intentionally stopped processing claims, leading to a huge backlog of people then being put into hotels etc. Your ire should be directed at a party intentionally causing a problem they thought would help them electorally. The current government has started making progress on the backlog, has overseen record numbers leaving, and it's trying to cut the costs off accommodation - though that is difficult as jenrick signed contracts with hotels until 2029. If you don't like the costs off asylum seekers then you should be supportive of these things. No matter what % are granted or not granted asylum in the end, while they are claiming asylum they are allowed to be here so allowing them to work would allow us to offset the cost, and potentially give them a route to show they are productive members of society, again something you should support if cost and fairness are your key concerns.

I can't speak for the whole left, but I think generally we don't particularly love our not live Islam, we just think everybody should be cared about. Tbh the activism around trans, LGBTQ, specific ethnicities etc is just that, activism by particularly interested people, it's not the whole left. I'm not a fan of this lumping the left together then pointing at the fringe activists. Now I realise you might come back to day I do the same with the right. Perhaps I do, I'll give some thought to that. But reform as a movement tends to be behind the things I rail about, rather than fringe groups. That's my excuse anyway 😁

I'm not okay with one and not the other. Most the England flags that have gone up are cheap Chinese crap that looks ropey AF. These are separate things.

So part of the campaign meant politicical parties trying to gain support by talking about the interests of the local people and through displays of national pride? How does that differ from reform and the endless ropey looking English flags flying everywhere?

Can we just unpack this. Asylum seekers are housed minimally (even where hotels are used they don't get access to normal hotel services, food etc). They don't get benefits, they get a small amount of money, much less than benefits, to survive with. They get healthcare like everybody else, you surely don't think we should let them die? They are not allowed to work. Other countries allow asylum seekers to work so that they are able to contribute towards their own costs. Would you agree that would be a sensible change? In reality asylum seekers come from a while variety of backgrounds and would inevitably have skills that could be useful. Let them work to offset costs and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad.

Yes

Unfortunately, an area held by labour since 1931 is nowhere near the top of its target seat list. They've shown an ability to take a lot of votes again, even somewhere pretty pretty leaning. Of their 15% of the vote, 2/5th came from labour. Quite. Trying to appeal to reform voters clearly isn't holding their party coalition together. They get smashed by the Tory press every day no matter what they do so start spending some money on fixing the lives of ordinary people please. Leaving Burnham out will prove to be disastrous if starmar ends up out of the job in the next year too as I think he's labour's personality with broadest appeal to the electorate. For the Tories, they are in disarray down to 2% of the vote from 8% previously. Any talk of a banenoch improvement smashed to smithereens.

Terrible footballer. Can't wait for us to reset our strike force. They certainly don't deserve that title currently.

Well if I read it wrong my apologies, I'm not sure what else you meant by it though 🤷 I wonder whether you might be doing the same thing by assuming by comments to be a sneering attack though, as I wasn't feeling particularly sneery while writing it? Anyway, let's agree to disagree and move on to avoid escalating our little tiff 🤝

Lol how is that a personal insult? You keep trying to be funny about any criticism of labour being labelled far right, which it isn't by the way, in a way that very much makes it look like you're personally afronted. It's a bit ridiculous. So while you didn't say it, that's how it looks. It's not a personal insult, just an observation. I have no reason to personally insult you. Let's end this here as even this conversation is a bit ridiculous.