CornwallFox

Actually went on a few dates with a hot asylum seeker, true story. She got leave to remain and is training as a nurse now.

I'm left wing and I absolutely support free speech. And I also do happen to think there should have been more open and honest debate around immigration, the economy, and a host of other things. But I don't believe for a second that the people involved in this really have free speech at the forefront of their minds. Tommy Robinson front and centre tells you everything you need to know.

When you go online and look at pictures of the event almost every comment underneath is directly racist. Unfortunately about 30-35% of the population now have absolutely no qualms in acting this way.

Must be hard for them with such a lack of freedom of speech. They only have multiple newspapers and TV channels dedicated to their views. I'm sure they'll be just as supportive of the right to speech next time somebody says they're not sure about the ropey looking flags painted onto mini roundabouts.

Terrible idea. Absolutely nobody is calling for the play offs to be altered.

F all to do with free speech

The fact an individual at a university wrote a tweet does not indicate that everybody at that university, or the university itself, has anything to do with it. Much like if the shooter turns out to be right/left/gay/religious/satanic/anything else, it doesn't mean anybody else of that group is similarly minded. Half the problems we have in the world stem from us pigeon holing whole groups, particularly if we disagree with them in some way.

.

So straight to the conspiracy theories is it?

There's video of him which is very clear

It's a big old country to get across when your face is plastered everywhere

It would be nice if we paid as much attention to things that directly affected the lives of ordinary people: public services worked, people had enough money to buy a house, holiday or a treat occasionally, people generally felt happy and not ground down through worries about money or the state of the nation etc. Growth is great and all, but we don't often see the proceeds of it being used to actually improve anything for anybody. These days a high % of any increase to GDP effectively goes straight to shareholders. And much of the growth we've seen in recent years has simply been inflation led. And yes you can say pension schemes etc are some of those shareholders, but jam tomorrow really is getting old by now. I'd rather see a fundamental change in our economic system with zero growth, to more fairly distribute the proceeds of that system between labour and capital.

I've seen comments about football in TV and I hate that we've reached a point where you have to have about six different subscriptions to watch half of football matches. This isn't good for anybody. PL and EFL should be forced legislatively to have 100% of matches available via one service provider. If you can watch every game overseas it is just another example of ordinary Brits being screwed.

And on this point we agree.

It's irrelevant what you think. Her circumstances were examined, including the legal advice she'd had, and it was found that she believed in good faith she was due to pay the lower rate, that she self referred as soon as that came into question, and that her error was relying on legal advice that wasn't specialist. Her resignation was due to the finding that, report the report being clear that it is believed she did intend to pay the correct rate, hence getting advice, because she had made an error that was enough to be a breach of the ministerial code. And so she resigned. She made an error, it wasn't intentional, she self referred herself, and she resigned upon receiving the report. Everything there speaks of somebody with a moral compass.

And with regard to farage, first he said he bought the house. Then he said he misspoke and actually she bought the house. Now questions are being asked about how she funded that the position is changing from her family gave her the money, towards possibly farage gave her the money..... Let's face it, he bought the house, put it in her name, and avoided paying tax. If you think these are the actions of a future PM id suggest you reflect on what you'd say if it was starmar.

The official report into her conduct, which considered her situation in a way you or I wouldn't know it, stated very clearly that her affairs were complex and that she didn't intentionally mislead. That's the official examination of the facts.

Thing is, the official report finds that Raynor had declared what she believed to be correct, that her affairs were very complex, and that she's been open and transparent. Farage may or may not have stayed within the law by what sounds like exploiting loopholes and not being straight about it. Yet somehow his supporters think he's the honest one 🤷🏻

What's this news about the trump AI announcement come from? Is that real? I see mandelson has gone on the back of gossip. I really hate the fake moralisation of politics. He knew a bloke who turned out to be a wrong'un but isn't accused of doing anything wrong himself. Seems bizarre to me.

Tbh I think it's fairly obvious that more guns isn't creating safety in America without needing a study.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2759797/ I found this within ten seconds of googling it Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

Usually somebody will be quoting something they've read elsewhere - ie a news report on gun crime talking about what studies have found - rather than through having intimate knowledge of those studies personally.

Genuinely not looking for an argument here but I hate it when people write 'source' online, as if an ordinary person will have a list of references for everything they've seen. Now, you certainly shouldn't believe claims made online either, so requiring evidence of the claim absolutely is needed if you're going to reconsider your position, but expecting an ordinary football fan to give you a link to a detailed study is clearly not realistic. I think the only sensible middle ground is not to believe them, but to question whether they're correct by going online to see if I can support what they've said with evidence.

Google is usually your best starting point. It's common sense though. A gun is usually carried by the criminal to give them power so they they can carry out a different crime - a theft or whatever. If the victim simply complies then they run away with the goods, no shots fired. If the victim pulls out a gun, there a high chance they get shot.

Firstly, he's the director of football, not the finance director. Second, do you honestly do you honestly still believe transfer rumours?