Also in the news

[Grebfromgrebland]

The Observer

Ukip candidates urge followers to switch to far-right social network Gab

Hate-filled platform has no restrictions on antisemitic, misogynist or racist content

Sam Hall

Sat 11 May 2019 16.00 BSTLast modified on Sat 11 May 2019 18.20 BST

•  
•  
•  

Shares

305

 

 

Leading figures on the far right, including Ukip candidates in the upcoming European elections, are encouraging their followers to join a new hate-filled social media platform. The network, called Gab, has no restrictions on antisemitic, misogynist or racist content, and has been used to promote terrorism.

Gab, launched in 2017 by tech entrepreneur Andrew Torba, describes itself as a vehicle for “free speech” and is similar to Twitter in that it allows users to send messages of up to 3,000 characters, called “gabs”.

However, unlike Twitter, its user base mainly consists of people on the far right, many of whom joined after being banned from mainstream networks such as Facebook and Twitter.

The site gained notoriety following the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in October 2018 that left 11 Jewish worshippers dead. The perpetrator of the massacre, Robert Bowers, had made frequent antisemitic postings on the site, including one saying he was about to carry out the attack. After a backlash from hosting service providers, Gab went offline briefly, but it is now accessible again.

Carl Benjamin, the prospective Ukip candidate for south-west England in the European parliamentary elections on 23 May – who refused to apologise for tweeting “I wouldn’t even rape you” to Labour MP Jess Phillips – joined Gab after being banned from Twitter.

Benjamin, who calls himself “Sargon of Akkad” on Gab, recently used the platform to post “Batten is a legend” in response to Ukip leader Gerard Batten’s defence of Benjamin’s tweets as “free speech” and “satire”. He wrote “I stand by every word” in reference to his comments on rape. He went on to ‘joke’ this week that he might rape Jess Phillips saying: “With enough pressure I might cave”. Three female Ukip MEPs – Jane Collins, Jill Seymour and Margot Parker – have already quit the party to join Nigel Farage’s new Brexit party over the handling of the issue.

Trump tweets support for far-right figures banned by Facebook

 

 

Read more

He also posted: “Answer only if you are alt-right please: If you had to choose, would you choose to have either Muslims or Jews in your country?”

Mark Meechan, Ukip candidate for Scotland in the European elections, also has an account on Gab, where he wrote: “looking forward to the day sites like this finally take over”. Meechan, who goes by the online pseudonym “Count Dankula”, was fined £800 last year for teaching a dog to do a Nazi salute to phrases such as “sieg heil” and “gas the Jews” and then uploading videos of it to YouTube.

Another active user is Jolene Bunting, who served on Belfast city council as an independent unionist councillor until losing her seat in the local elections on 2 May. She has frequently posted in support of Tommy Robinson, the far-right activist whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, in addition to posting a meme that mocked the Irish famine.

Following his recent ban from Facebook, along with 11 other far-right individuals and organisations, Nick Griffin, the former leader of the BNP and self-described “lifelong white rights fighter” tweeted: “How much longer before Twitter follow suit? Join me on Gab and Telegram and help build the free speech resistance.”

Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you

 

 

Read more

The former deputy leader of Britain First, Jayda Fransen, who was also banned from Facebook, recently used Gab to refer to the prime minister as “Treason May”, and then hours later shared an image calling for treason to be “punishable by death” accompanied by the caption: “if only!”. Fransen also used Gab to call Theresa May a “treacherous old hag”. She was sentenced to 36 weeks in prison for anti-Muslim hate crimes last year and Donald Trump had previously attracted criticism for retweeting some of her posts.

Two teenagers recently pleaded guilty to terror offences that included distributing propaganda on Gab for Sonnenkrieg Division, a neo-Nazi group. It that said among other things that Prince Harry was a “race traitor” who should be shot. Michal Szewczuk, 19, of Leeds, also used a separate account on Gab to post links to articles he wrote that called for the “systematic slaughtering” of women and the rape of babies.

 

We condemn any social media platforms that allow themselves to be used to spread extremist propaganda

Home Office spokesperson

The migration of far-right figures to Gab has been mirrored in other countries, including America and Australia. Alex Jones, the American conspiracy theorist – who claimed that the Sandy Hook massacre, in which 20 children and six adults were murdered, was “staged” – has maintained an active presence on Gab since being removed from YouTube and Twitter. Australian far-right activists Blair Cottrell and Neil Erikson also turned to Gab after being recently banned from Twitter and Facebook.

Many far-right groups, including Britain First, have also relocated their accounts to the encrypted messaging app Telegram, where groups of up to 200,000 people can be managed. Similar action was taken by accounts that were banned from Facebook and Twitter for promoting Isis in 2015.

The government has taken strong action against online Islamic extremism: last year the Home Office announced the development of a tool that could “automatically detect 94% of Islamic State propaganda with 99.995% accuracy”. However, Bharath Ganesh, of Oxford University’s Internet Institute, told Prospect magazine: “I have not seen any evidence that technology is being deployed to counter the extreme right in the same way it is applied to jihadism.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “It is illegal to share terrorist content online and we condemn any social media platforms that allow themselves to be used to spread extremist propaganda. We continue to work with international partners and tech companies to tackle online terrorist and extremist propaganda, but we are clear they must go further and faster.

“That is why we are introducing a statutory duty of care to make companies take responsibility for the safety of their users, and an independent regulator to take enforcement action where they fail to do so.”

[Guest MattP]

58 minutes ago, Buce said:

This is the most depressing statistic:

 

"The poll reveals 36% are not aware of the Conservative party’s stance, while 38% say the same about Labour.

For those who said they knew, 23% think the Conservatives support a soft Brexit, while 23% think they support a hard Brexit. For the Labour party, 25% think they support remaining in the EU, while 31% think they support a soft Brexit."

 

Exactly the same as before - people with little or no understanding of the issue making decisions for the rest of us.

I dont know why you think this means people are stupid? Surely that is down to the parties? 

 

I mean I follow politics and I couldn't give you a clear definition now on whether Labour or the Tories as a collective back a hard or soft Brexit - can you?

[Buce]

18 minutes ago, MattP said:

I dont know why you think this means people are stupid? Surely that is down to the parties? 

 

I mean I follow politics and I couldn't give you a clear definition now on whether Labour or the Tories as a collective back a hard or soft Brexit - can you?

 

Yeah, it was a poor choice of words - I should have said, ‘ill-informed’ and, yes, that is largely down to what’s going on with Labour and the Tories. I was just snapping at FIF, really. 

 

Nonetheless, whatever the cause, the result is that we may elect soundbite politicians through the political ignorance of the masses. 

And the danger of that is that we end up with another Hitler or Stalin. That should be of concern to us all. 

 

 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

Yeah, it was a poor choice of words - I should have said, ‘ill-informed’ and, yes, that is largely down to what’s going on with Labour and the Tories. I was just snapping at FIF, really. 

 

Nonetheless, whatever the cause, the result is that we may elect soundbite politicians through the political ignorance of the masses. 

And the danger of that is that we end up with another Hitler or Stalin. That should be of concern to us all. 

If a populist arises from the situation in this country it will be the ignorance of the politicians that has caused it. 

 

I'm absolutely astounded there is surprise at the resurgence of Farage and the Brexit Party topping polls - I spoke to people last night who were "amazed" he is back - to quote Dan Hodges, People voted to leave the EU. We haven't left the EU. That's it. We don't need a thousand word thesis to explain or rationalise it. It's as complex as 1+1=2, and about as surprising as the sun rising in the morning.

 

Some people (and I'm not accusing you here) genuinely think you can just ignore a democratic exercise and people will just fall into line - it's completely batshit crazy.

[Milo]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

You can call it what you like.

 

What it is is a stupidocracy (yes, I've introduced a new word into the English language - it means 'a society governed by people selected by the stupid')

So everyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid?

 

Sounds great - I'm in!

[Buce]

7 minutes ago, Milo said:

So everyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid?

 

Sounds great - I'm in!

 

That isn’t what I said. 

[leicsmac]

19 minutes ago, MattP said:

If a populist arises from the situation in this country it will be the ignorance of the politicians that has caused it. 

 

I'm absolutely astounded there is surprise at the resurgence of Farage and the Brexit Party topping polls - I spoke to people last night who were "amazed" he is back - to quote Dan Hodges, People voted to leave the EU. We haven't left the EU. That's it. We don't need a thousand word thesis to explain or rationalise it. It's as complex as 1+1=2, and about as surprising as the sun rising in the morning.

 

Some people (and I'm not accusing you here) genuinely think you can just ignore a democratic exercise and people will just fall into line - it's completely batshit crazy.

I can see where you're coming from here, however (and this has been discussed before) when a populist does arise and the people who voted them in are at least reasonably aware of the consequences of such, I'm not sure they escape at least a modicum of responsibility for the aforementioned consequences.

 

Following on from that (and this is a point that can be made elsewhere too) people in this matter should perhaps be more interested in the consequences of choices made than the placement of responsibility for those choices - they are more important, IMO.

[Milo]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

That isn’t what I said. 

Ah, sorry, that's how I read it. (good word, though)

 

I don't know about a Hitler or Stalin arising - to me it's more akin to the last knockings of the Roman republic. A paralysed elitist government ignoring the majority and along comes a popularist Caesar to the rescue  

 

 

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Milo said:

Ah, sorry, that's how I read it. (good word, though)

 

I don't know about a Hitler or Stalin arising - to me it's more akin to the last knockings of the Roman republic. A paralysed elitist government ignoring the majority and along comes a popularist Caesar to the rescue  

 

 

 

I dispute that it is the will of the majority - this is where the ‘it’s democracy’ argument falls down. 

 

Seventeen million people is barely 25% of the population, not even nearly a majority. 

[ousefox]

Farage has taken some lessons from Trump looking at that Marr interview. He just repeats himself over and over again, screams betrayal at every opportunity and is now attacking the BBC when he doesn't like a question.

 

Extremely sad and scary what this has come to.

[Buce]

 

Calls for a ‘sex strike’ in Georgia over abortion law:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48242766

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

I dispute that it is the will of the majority - this is where the ‘it’s democracy’ argument falls down. 

 

Seventeen million people is barely 25% of the population, not even nearly a majority. 

Why do non voters count? They don't. 

 

Labour will probably win the next election with less than half the voters who voted Brexit - but that's legitimate under our system.

 

You are never going to be able to have a situation where over 50% of the population votes for something, Brexit was the democratic choice the country made and it's the biggest mandate for anything in the history of the nation with 17.4 million having voted for it.

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

Why do non voters count? They don't. 

 

Labour will probably win the next election with less than half the voters who voted Brexit - but that's legitimate under our system.

 

You are never going to be able to have a situation where over 50% of the population votes for something, Brexit was the democratic choice the country made and it's the biggest mandate for anything in the history of the nation with 17.4 million having voted for it.

 

It was not the will of the majority, however you like to spin it. 

[Milo]

Just now, Buce said:

 

It was not the will of the majority, however you like to spin it. 

So might as well bin any election process then - whats the point

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Milo said:

So might as well bin any election process then - whats the point

 

Very little point under our electoral system. Some form of PR is the answer, as well as giving a voice to more people by lowering the voting age to 16. 

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, Buce said:

Very little point under our electoral system. Some form of PR is the answer, as well as giving a voice to more people by lowering the voting age to 16. 

Should we lower the age of responsibility on everything to 16?

 

No form of PR is going to give you a 50%+ of the population government either. 

Edited 12 May 2019 by MattP

[Milo]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Very little point under our electoral system. Some form of PR is the answer, as well as giving a voice to more people by lowering the voting age to 16. 

The Brexit referendum was the closest thing to one person one vote that I have ever experienced as a voter.

 

You seem to say that unless there is a 100% turnout, then the result should not be acknowledged, as those who didn't vote would have voted either one way or the other...  

[Heathrow fox]

2 minutes ago, Milo said:

The Brexit referendum was the closest thing to one person one vote that I have ever experienced as a voter.

 

You seem to say that unless there is a 100% turnout, then the result should not be acknowledged, as those who didn't vote would have voted either one way or the other...  

Yes the referendum was the most democratic vote many would have participated in.It didn’t matter if you were a hardened Tory living in Barnsley like our GE.Your vote counted.I found it quite refreshing.

[Buce]

11 minutes ago, Milo said:

The Brexit referendum was the closest thing to one person one vote that I have ever experienced as a voter.

 

You seem to say that unless there is a 100% turnout, then the result should not be acknowledged, as those who didn't vote would have voted either one way or the other...  

 

4 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

Yes the referendum was the most democratic vote many would have participated in.It didn’t matter if you were a hardened Tory living in Barnsley like our GE.Your vote counted.I found it quite refreshing.

 

Not at all. 

 

It gave a disproportionate say to those who won’t live to see the consequences. 

 

We, as a society, say that at sixteen you are mature enough to bring a child into the world, but not mature enough to decide what kind of world it is born into. Do you not see the contradiction in that? 

 

Meanwhile, there is no upper age limit preventing people in cognitive decline from having their say. 

 

Call it what you like but democracy it isn’t. 

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I dispute that it is the will of the majority - this is where the ‘it’s democracy’ argument falls down. 

 

Seventeen million people is barely 25% of the population, not even nearly a majority. 

Have we ever had a decision that was the will of the majority?

 

I'm not a great fan of democracy - people are misled or ill-informed or stupid. Very few people understand the policies and less  their consequences and that includes the people creating them. I think this Brexit fiasco has shown the public that the politicians are simply incapable of doing the job that they are supposed to do. Sadly we haven't found a better system that the one we use - unless it's democracy with a forced vote - Who is to decide which people are not stupid or ill-informed? Should it just be those of us with Masters degrees or Doctorates or maybe just those who study law - even then who decides who meet the required standards. Those questions are of course rhetorical. We have hit a political malaise and we're in trouble.

 

 

50 minutes ago, MattP said:

If a populist arises from the situation in this country it will be the ignorance of the politicians that has caused it. 

 

I'm absolutely astounded there is surprise at the resurgence of Farage and the Brexit Party topping polls - I spoke to people last night who were "amazed" he is back - to quote Dan Hodges, People voted to leave the EU. We haven't left the EU. That's it. We don't need a thousand word thesis to explain or rationalise it. It's as complex as 1+1=2, and about as surprising as the sun rising in the morning.

 

Some people (and I'm not accusing you here) genuinely think you can just ignore a democratic exercise and people will just fall into line - it's completely batshit crazy.

To the extent that Politicians are partly to blame I agree with you. Politicians have become "populists" rather than "thinkers" they are more in it for themselves than for the community they should serve. Sadly though the problem is far wider than that. We have moved into a populist global situation (at least in the west) where celebrity is far more important than idea, where people need their 15 minutes. I have little doubt that if Rap singers, girl and boy bands, Actors, sports stars, comedians all got together under the leadership of whoever is the countries' darling of the moment. The Celbrity party would get themselves elected And Harry Maguire could be prime minister.

 

 

1 hour ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

The Observer

Ukip candidates urge followers to switch to far-right social network Gab

Hate-filled platform has no restrictions on antisemitic, misogynist or racist content

Sam Hall

Sat 11 May 2019 16.00 BSTLast modified on Sat 11 May 2019 18.20 BST

•  
•  
•  

Shares

305

 

 

Leading figures on the far right, including Ukip candidates in the upcoming European elections, are encouraging their followers to join a new hate-filled social media platform. The network, called Gab, has no restrictions on antisemitic, misogynist or racist content, and has been used to promote terrorism.

Gab, launched in 2017 by tech entrepreneur Andrew Torba, describes itself as a vehicle for “free speech” and is similar to Twitter in that it allows users to send messages of up to 3,000 characters, called “gabs”.

However, unlike Twitter, its user base mainly consists of people on the far right, many of whom joined after being banned from mainstream networks such as Facebook and Twitter.

The site gained notoriety following the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in October 2018 that left 11 Jewish worshippers dead. The perpetrator of the massacre, Robert Bowers, had made frequent antisemitic postings on the site, including one saying he was about to carry out the attack. After a backlash from hosting service providers, Gab went offline briefly, but it is now accessible again.

Carl Benjamin, the prospective Ukip candidate for south-west England in the European parliamentary elections on 23 May – who refused to apologise for tweeting “I wouldn’t even rape you” to Labour MP Jess Phillips – joined Gab after being banned from Twitter.

Benjamin, who calls himself “Sargon of Akkad” on Gab, recently used the platform to post “Batten is a legend” in response to Ukip leader Gerard Batten’s defence of Benjamin’s tweets as “free speech” and “satire”. He wrote “I stand by every word” in reference to his comments on rape. He went on to ‘joke’ this week that he might rape Jess Phillips saying: “With enough pressure I might cave”. Three female Ukip MEPs – Jane Collins, Jill Seymour and Margot Parker – have already quit the party to join Nigel Farage’s new Brexit party over the handling of the issue.

Trump tweets support for far-right figures banned by Facebook

 

 

Read more

He also posted: “Answer only if you are alt-right please: If you had to choose, would you choose to have either Muslims or Jews in your country?”

Mark Meechan, Ukip candidate for Scotland in the European elections, also has an account on Gab, where he wrote: “looking forward to the day sites like this finally take over”. Meechan, who goes by the online pseudonym “Count Dankula”, was fined £800 last year for teaching a dog to do a Nazi salute to phrases such as “sieg heil” and “gas the Jews” and then uploading videos of it to YouTube.

Another active user is Jolene Bunting, who served on Belfast city council as an independent unionist councillor until losing her seat in the local elections on 2 May. She has frequently posted in support of Tommy Robinson, the far-right activist whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, in addition to posting a meme that mocked the Irish famine.

Following his recent ban from Facebook, along with 11 other far-right individuals and organisations, Nick Griffin, the former leader of the BNP and self-described “lifelong white rights fighter” tweeted: “How much longer before Twitter follow suit? Join me on Gab and Telegram and help build the free speech resistance.”

Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you

 

 

Read more

The former deputy leader of Britain First, Jayda Fransen, who was also banned from Facebook, recently used Gab to refer to the prime minister as “Treason May”, and then hours later shared an image calling for treason to be “punishable by death” accompanied by the caption: “if only!”. Fransen also used Gab to call Theresa May a “treacherous old hag”. She was sentenced to 36 weeks in prison for anti-Muslim hate crimes last year and Donald Trump had previously attracted criticism for retweeting some of her posts.

Two teenagers recently pleaded guilty to terror offences that included distributing propaganda on Gab for Sonnenkrieg Division, a neo-Nazi group. It that said among other things that Prince Harry was a “race traitor” who should be shot. Michal Szewczuk, 19, of Leeds, also used a separate account on Gab to post links to articles he wrote that called for the “systematic slaughtering” of women and the rape of babies.

 

We condemn any social media platforms that allow themselves to be used to spread extremist propaganda

Home Office spokesperson

The migration of far-right figures to Gab has been mirrored in other countries, including America and Australia. Alex Jones, the American conspiracy theorist – who claimed that the Sandy Hook massacre, in which 20 children and six adults were murdered, was “staged” – has maintained an active presence on Gab since being removed from YouTube and Twitter. Australian far-right activists Blair Cottrell and Neil Erikson also turned to Gab after being recently banned from Twitter and Facebook.

Many far-right groups, including Britain First, have also relocated their accounts to the encrypted messaging app Telegram, where groups of up to 200,000 people can be managed. Similar action was taken by accounts that were banned from Facebook and Twitter for promoting Isis in 2015.

The government has taken strong action against online Islamic extremism: last year the Home Office announced the development of a tool that could “automatically detect 94% of Islamic State propaganda with 99.995% accuracy”. However, Bharath Ganesh, of Oxford University’s Internet Institute, told Prospect magazine: “I have not seen any evidence that technology is being deployed to counter the extreme right in the same way it is applied to jihadism.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “It is illegal to share terrorist content online and we condemn any social media platforms that allow themselves to be used to spread extremist propaganda. We continue to work with international partners and tech companies to tackle online terrorist and extremist propaganda, but we are clear they must go further and faster.

“That is why we are introducing a statutory duty of care to make companies take responsibility for the safety of their users, and an independent regulator to take enforcement action where they fail to do so.”

As despicable as the views of some of these people are, the media is not the problem. Banning people from Facebook or Twitter is obviously a bit stupid. I think that GAB as hideous as the views are that are discussed there is good in that it gives these like-minded people a forum where they can be surveyed and spotted. These views are wrong but banning from media is not going to stop them is it? These people need to be identified and then educated/corrected/strung up () you can choose dependant on your world view. Again I think it's important to note that it's the followers who are even more dangerous than these fools, mainstream politicians need to convince those people how wrong the ideas of the FAR right extremists are and reduce the flow of followers. Starving the idol is the way to cripple a false prophet.

 

 

 

56 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Yeah, it was a poor choice of words - I should have said, ‘ill-informed’ and, yes, that is largely down to what’s going on with Labour and the Tories. I was just snapping at FIF, really. 

 

Nonetheless, whatever the cause, the result is that we may elect soundbite politicians through the political ignorance of the masses. 

And the danger of that is that we end up with another Hitler or Stalin. That should be of concern to us all. 

 

 

As I said I think we have been electing soundbite politicians on soundbite policies for many years. We may end up with a Hitler or a Stalin but I think we're much more likely to end up with an ANT or DEC or a Simon Cowell.

 

 

11 minutes ago, MattP said:

Why do non voters count? They don't. 

 

Labour will probably win the next election with less than half the voters who voted Brexit - but that's legitimate under our system.

 

You are never going to be able to have a situation where over 50% of the population votes for something, Brexit was the democratic choice the country made and it's the biggest mandate for anything in the history of the nation with 17.4 million having voted for it.

Everybody should count. Politicans have accepted that a vast majority of people won't vote. To me that is unacceptable. Everyone needs to realise the importance of their vote. People don't.

[bovril]

17 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

Yes the referendum was the most democratic vote many would have participated in.It didn’t matter if you were a hardened Tory living in Barnsley like our GE.Your vote counted.I found it quite refreshing.

Do you think it's democratic that citizens of EU countries now need to apply for settled status - sending their personal information to the home office - because of a referendum they weren't allowed to take part in?

[Heathrow fox]

1 minute ago, bovril said:

Do you think it's democratic that citizens of EU countries now need to apply for settled status - sending their personal information to the home office - because of a referendum they weren't allowed to take part in?

Quite frankly yes.I would expect nothing less if I was in the same situation.Living in an EU country that had just had a leave remain referendum.

[bovril]

2 minutes ago, Heathrow fox said:

Quite frankly yes.I would expect nothing less if I was in the same situation.Living in an EU country that had just had a leave remain referendum.

You'd be fine if you were living with your family in another country and your status changed because of a vote you couldn't take part in? I'm not sure I'd be so laid back about it. 

[Alf Bentley]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

For some reason he doesn't even want to be the forefront of anything, didn't fancy the Labour leadership contest and now thrown this over to Allen.

 

Soubry seems to be the goto public face if them, which is obviously a terrible decision - and if it's a terrible decision you can almost guarantee that's the one Change UK will take.

 

"Invisible Man" Umunna is booked to appear on Marr next Sunday, apparently.

 

I wonder if it's partly a tactical decision to have Allen and Soubry in the front line?

- Making clear that Change UK isn't just a Labour splinter group (most of the defectors were Lab) & hoping to attract Tory defectors?

- Attracting women voters by having a more female media image (Allen & Soubry the main option as Berger has a new baby & the other Lab woman stuck her foot in her mouth)?

 

Change UK certainly seems to have made a monumental mess of everything so far. Unless they pull out something spectacular in the next 10 days, I can see them getting less than 3% of the vote, no MEPs - and what then?

I suppose they could decide what else they stand for apart from Remain and achieve a successful relaunch, but that's a tough task. They'll end up negotiating surrender terms with the Lib Dems at this rate.

[Heathrow fox]

19 minutes ago, bovril said:

You'd be fine if you were living with your family in another country and your status changed because of a vote you couldn't take part in? I'm not sure I'd be so laid back about it. 

If I was happy and settled I couldn’t say i’d be over the moon about it.I’d except it though certainly.