General News Thread

[Free Falling Foxes]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

Can you define what a fascist is, off the top of your head?

 

16 minutes ago, l444ry said:

A political system based on a powerful leader, state control, and being extremely proud of country and race, and which political opposition is not allowed. 

Off the top of your head, or a copy and paste off the online Cambridge dictionary? 

Edited 2 December 2025 by Free Falling Foxes

[danny.]

24 minutes ago, l444ry said:

A political system based on a powerful leader, state control, and being extremely proud of country and race, and which political opposition is not allowed. 

When you copy and paste, best to paste as plain text as the different font and colour is a bit of a giveaway 

Edited 2 December 2025 by danny.

[Trav Le Bleu]

21 minutes ago, l444ry said:

A political system based on a powerful leader, state control, and being extremely proud of country and race, and which political opposition is not allowed. 

Sounds a lot like the current USA administration

 

Ok, so political opposition is allowed, but it isn't recognised and frequently attempted to be quashed.

 

(TBF, pretty much all political parties don't recognise even legitimate criticism, which is one of the problems with party politics, even if individuals occasionally break ranks.)

[l444ry]

19 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

 

Off the top of your head, or a copy and paste off the online Cambridge dictionary? 

Cambridge Dictionary. Far better definition than I could give and certainly more authoritative to avoid nitpickers.

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Sounds a lot like the current USA administration

 

Ok, so political opposition is allowed, but it isn't recognised and frequently attempted to be quashed.

 

(TBF, pretty much all political parties don't recognise even legitimate criticism, which is one of the problems with party politics, even if individuals occasionally break ranks.)

Further to this, I would ask again; if a government or movement like the current US administration isn't described as (neo)fascist, then what word is best used?

 

Jon mentioned "opportunists", which I think does apply to some of them, but what about the "true believers", as it were?

 

Edit: example, how do you describe a man like Stephen Miller?

Edited 2 December 2025 by leicsmac

[danny.]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Further to this, I would ask again; if a government or movement like the current US administration isn't described as (neo)fascist, then what word is best used?

 

Jon mentioned "opportunists", which I think does apply to some of them, but what about the "true believers", as it were?

How about “government of a different political leaning to @leicsmac“?

 

Calling the US government facist well highlights that the majority of people who use the word facist don’t have a clue what it means. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 minutes ago, danny. said:

How about “government of a different political leaning to @leicsmac“?

 

Calling the US government facist well highlights that the majority of people who use the word facist don’t have a clue what it means. 

I'd say the same about the term "woke".

 

In both instances nobody particularly uses the term to refer to them, it's just a pejorative used by those who don't agree.

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, danny. said:

How about “government of a different political leaning to @leicsmac“?

 

Calling the US government facist well highlights that the majority of people who use the word facist don’t have a clue what it means. 

That's true, but it's also rather missing the point of the question. 

 

Still looking for other answers. 

[Tommy G]

56 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I'd say the same about the term "woke".

 

In both instances nobody particularly uses the term to refer to them, it's just a pejorative used by those who don't agree.

Proper woke post. 

[Livid]

Jury trials scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years - BBC News

 

David Lammy stepping up to the plate today and trying to take some of the heat off the Chancellor 

 

As someone who has voted Labour for most of his adult life i'm tired of the charade now. 

[Tommy G]

4 minutes ago, Livid said:

Jury trials scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years - BBC News

 

David Lammy stepping up to the plate today and trying to take some of the heat off the Chancellor 

 

As someone who has voted Labour for most of his adult life i'm tired of the charade now. 

The same bloke also historically opposed the idea until his party came into power...

[CornwallFox]

What a surprise

 

BBC News - Reeves did not mislead on challenges facing UK ahead of Budget, says OBR official - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj0ngnkl2vo

 

Questioned by MPs over the chancellor not mentioning the surplus in the forecast, Prof Miles said the £4.2bn, while a positive number, "was by a tiny margin", adding that the OBR was not actually looking for it to be interpreted as "this is very, very good news, there is no hole to fill - as people were saying".

 

"I don't think it was misleading, for my own view, for the chancellor to say that the fiscal position was very challenging at the beginning of that week.

 

"My interpretation was, and others might interpret differently, that the chancellor was saying that this was a very difficult Budget and very difficult choices needed to be made.

 

"And I don't think that that was in itself inconsistent with the final pre-measures assessment we'd made, which, although it showed a very small positive amount of so-called headroom, it was wafer thin."

 

Prof Miles added that the £4.2bn buffer would also have been reduced to minus £3bn because the OBR's forecast did not take into account the welfare and winter fuel payment U-turns made by the government.

Edited 2 December 2025 by CornwallFox

[Innovindil]

31 minutes ago, Livid said:

Jury trials scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years - BBC News

 

David Lammy stepping up to the plate today and trying to take some of the heat off the Chancellor 

 

As someone who has voted Labour for most of his adult life i'm tired of the charade now. 

Whole system is dogshit anyways. Only difference with this is you've got to convince one nobber instead of 12.

[CornwallFox]

28 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

The same bloke also historically opposed the idea until his party came into power...

So is it good or bad in your view? 

Did you support previous discussion of it? 

I'm not a fan of this btw 

[splinterdream]

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

So is it good or bad in your view? 

Did you support previous discussion of it? 

I'm not a fan of this btw 

As a Labour supporter, does this concern you a little? Are you supportive of all out Marxist authoritarian socialism? 

[leicsmac]

The only way to be sure about this is to actually look at case history, find the amount of known miscarriages of justice from cases on judge trials vs jury trials, and compare them. 

 

Data is the only thing upon which decision making should be based here.

[foxes1988]

2 hours ago, Livid said:

Jury trials scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years - BBC News

 

David Lammy stepping up to the plate today and trying to take some of the heat off the Chancellor 

 

As someone who has voted Labour for most of his adult life i'm tired of the charade now. 

Feel a bit uneasy about this tbh.

 

I'll give Labour credit on one thing. They are very decisive, if they think it's in the countries best interest they'll do it regardless of whether it's controversial or if the public even wants it

[Tommy G]

2 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

So is it good or bad in your view? 

Did you support previous discussion of it? 

I'm not a fan of this btw 

Don't like it. 

[Tommy G]

2 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

What a surprise

 

BBC News - Reeves did not mislead on challenges facing UK ahead of Budget, says OBR official - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj0ngnkl2vo

 

Questioned by MPs over the chancellor not mentioning the surplus in the forecast, Prof Miles said the £4.2bn, while a positive number, "was by a tiny margin", adding that the OBR was not actually looking for it to be interpreted as "this is very, very good news, there is no hole to fill - as people were saying".

 

"I don't think it was misleading, for my own view, for the chancellor to say that the fiscal position was very challenging at the beginning of that week.

 

"My interpretation was, and others might interpret differently, that the chancellor was saying that this was a very difficult Budget and very difficult choices needed to be made.

 

"And I don't think that that was in itself inconsistent with the final pre-measures assessment we'd made, which, although it showed a very small positive amount of so-called headroom, it was wafer thin."

 

Prof Miles added that the £4.2bn buffer would also have been reduced to minus £3bn because the OBR's forecast did not take into account the welfare and winter fuel payment U-turns made by the government.

*OBR boffin under pressure to take the heat of the government shocker* 

 

I don't think...

 

My interpretation was, and others might interpret differently...

 

Hardly a slam dunk is it. 

[Silebyfox_89]

3 hours ago, Livid said:

Jury trials scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years - BBC News

 

David Lammy stepping up to the plate today and trying to take some of the heat off the Chancellor 

 

As someone who has voted Labour for most of his adult life i'm tired of the charade now. 

Not necessarily a bad thing if it clears a backlog of cases and is only a temporary measure.

 

[danny.]

6 minutes ago, Silebyfox_89 said:

Not necessarily a bad thing if it clears a backlog of cases and is only a temporary measure.

 

Yup, for milder cases it’s pragmatic. If we had the resources I’d prefer jury each time but clearly we don’t. 
 

It’s not going to be temporary though, we won’t go back as this is cheaper. 
 

We also have a bigger problem with struggling to send people to jail because there isn’t enough space. 

[leicsmac]

38 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

*OBR boffin under pressure to take the heat of the government shocker* 

 

I don't think...

 

My interpretation was, and others might interpret differently...

 

Hardly a slam dunk is it. 

At the least, there's some uncertainty about it. 

 

Those thinking it was good or bad with certainty might want to consider that. 

[leicsmac]

8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Oh, it's patently obvious that they are liars and hypocrites. However, it appears that even Repub Congress members are looking at this one a bit dimly, which is something. 

 

8 hours ago, Md9 said:

They will blame someone else that was with them and absolutely nothing will happen to them no doubt as they seem to lie and get away with what ever they want. 
not sure they can justify blowing up drug boats the pardoning someone that has been out in jail for drugs but they will find a way to .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0r95q9kv1go

 

And we have our answer!

 

One fall-guy admiral, coming right up. 

 

Ten points for picking that one, ser.

[Tommy G]

57 minutes ago, danny. said:

Yup, for milder cases it’s pragmatic. If we had the resources I’d prefer jury each time but clearly we don’t. 
 

It’s not going to be temporary though, we won’t go back as this is cheaper. 
 

We also have a bigger problem with struggling to send people to jail because there isn’t enough space. 

The plan is just to release random people so that will help ease the pressure 

[Livid]

1 hour ago, Silebyfox_89 said:

Not necessarily a bad thing if it clears a backlog of cases and is only a temporary measure.

 

 

1 hour ago, danny. said:

Yup, for milder cases it’s pragmatic. If we had the resources I’d prefer jury each time but clearly we don’t. 
 

It’s not going to be temporary though, we won’t go back as this is cheaper. 
 

We also have a bigger problem with struggling to send people to jail because there isn’t enough space. 

I’m not sure which I would prefer.

 

I don’t think I would want some individuals I run into sitting on a jury but I’m thinking the odd nutter could be balanced out by the 11 others.

 

Then I look at the judiciary primarily made up of white male, middle class and privately educated some of whom are prone to looking a little bat shit crazy in their statements from time to time.

 

I think I would be a lot more comfortable with it if it was driven by an overall modernisation of the legal system rather than the need to to

clear up a massive backlog caused by years of underfunding.