Brexit Referendum - Page 595 - Politics and Economics

Mark Carney was 100% correct about what would happen after a leave outcome if nothing was done to stop it happening.

He predicted disaster and did his job responding to stop it from happening by cutting rates and releasing emergency borrowing with some quantitative easing.

The economy would have been a ****ing disaster if the adults in the room didn't safeguard against it happening.

02-19-2019 , 03:54 PM

#14852

diebitter

Grotesquely Handsome

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 65,711

How can you possibly know it's 100% correct if nothing was done to stop it happening?

02-19-2019 , 04:05 PM

#14853

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by diebitter

How can you possibly know it's 100% correct if nothing was done to stop it happening?

Do you want to run it twice?

The actions of the BOE averting disaster is a completely uncontroversial claim. Amongst the informed, anyway.

02-19-2019 , 04:33 PM

#14854

diebitter

Grotesquely Handsome

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 65,711

Just pointing out the ridiculous level of certainty you attach to things people couldn't possibly know.

You're level of confidence is 100% unfounded

02-19-2019 , 05:13 PM

#14855

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,849

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47296821

Quote:

One of the protesters involved in an incident outside Parliament with Tory MP Anna Soubry has been charged with harassment.

James Goddard, 29, has also been charged with two public order offences, the Crown Prosecution Service said.

The details of the charges are that Mr Goddard caused harassment, between December 18 2018 and January 8 2019, contrary to section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

He is also charged with causing racially aggravated harassment, alarm or distress on 7 January, contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; and with causing harassment, alarm or distress on 7 January, contrary to section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986.

02-20-2019 , 02:46 AM

#14856

SiMor29

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 4,985

Quote:

Originally Posted by diebitter

How can you possibly know it's 100% correct if nothing was done to stop it happening?

Because it’s still a ****ing disaster.

02-20-2019 , 03:14 AM

#14857

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 12,234

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

I have even had Charles de Gaulle given as the reason why we should leave

Peanuts. I've had Lord ****ing Nelson cited.

02-20-2019 , 02:07 PM

#14858

diebitter

Grotesquely Handsome

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 65,711

I try to cite Henry VIII myself

02-20-2019 , 02:29 PM

#14859

tomdemaine

Just tries harder

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 20,065

Quote:

Originally Posted by diebitter

I try to cite Henry VIII myself

We could certainly do with another Dissolution of the Monasteries. Although instead of churches we should be taking land off anyone with a number in their name. 3rd Duke of argyle? Grab the assets.

02-20-2019 , 02:35 PM

#14860

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47296821

Ive still not seen or heard anything about this which shouldn't be protected under free speech.

Not that we actually have free speech in this country. But, still, we should, and that should include shouting awful stuff at politicians especially outside of parliament.

02-20-2019 , 02:38 PM

#14861

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 12,234

Harassment is not the same as exercising freedom of speech (though I expect that's what James "I'm just a normal Tory voter" Goddard will claim he was doing).

You might want to rethink your position on this one .

02-20-2019 , 02:43 PM

#14862

Strontium Dog

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2018 Posts: 356

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomdemaine

We could certainly do with another Dissolution of the Monasteries. Although instead of churches we should be taking land off anyone with a number in their name. 3rd Duke of argyle? Grab the assets.

https://whoownsengland.org/

is a interesting read.

02-20-2019 , 03:00 PM

#14863

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,748

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

Then you understand nothing. Harassment is not free speech and MPs are entitled to the protection of the law like everyone else. Now go and tidy your room.

02-20-2019 , 03:03 PM

#14864

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,748

Quote:

Originally Posted by diebitter

You're level of confidence is 100% unfounded

You're (and here I am making the correct use of the abbreviation for 'You are') somewhat overconfident in your command of the English language.

02-20-2019 , 03:12 PM

#14865

diebitter

Grotesquely Handsome

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 65,711

Your right.

And in real news (not nitwit pedantry)....

Former EU ambassador says no-deal 'means hard border'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47311212

02-20-2019 , 03:42 PM

#14866

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalfrezi

What is free speech and protest if you can't shout things at politicians on two occasions whilst outside of parliament?

What he did would be free speech in America, as one example.

I am super uncomfortable with the idea that if you go to parliament and repeatedly call a politician a bad name you can be arrested and have your life upended.

02-20-2019 , 03:52 PM

#14867

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 12,234

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

So what if Americans can do it. They can own guns and go around shooting people in "self-defence".

We have laws here to mitigate against anti-social behaviour and anti-hate laws that work pretty well. I gave the example of a mate decades ago who came across Michael Heseltine campaigning in the 80s and told him he was an eejit. That's freedom of speech, but if he'd sought Heseltine out repeatedly to shout in his face, that would be harassment.

Your defence of harassment is weird and a bit troubling.

Last edited by jalfrezi; 02-20-2019 at 04:12 PM.

02-20-2019 , 04:45 PM

#14868

Strontium Dog

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2018 Posts: 356

**** him - he's an alt-right racist gob****e - #wwg1gwa Qanon bull**** as well.

Jab 8th - 'Yellow jacket' protester James Goddard booted off Facebook and Paypal

Quote:

Mr Goddard claims not to be a member of any political group.

But he and his supporters have been accused of hijacking the Brexit debate to push a far-right agenda.

Nick Lowles, CEO of anti-fascist group Hope Not Hate, said: “The British far right are attempting to copy the French ‘yellow vests’ protests in order to stir up trouble and harass, threaten and attack their political opponents.”

A profile under Mr Goddard’s name on social network website Gab posted a torrent of anti-Islam and anti-immigrant abuse.

In December 2017, a message was posted under his name which read: “All illegals need deporting ASAP.

“It's about time the indigenous people of Great Britain, were put first.”

The account also ‘reposted’ a reply from another user to his comment, which read: “Think big. Not just the illegals.

“P**i traitors of any stripe, along with your treasonous officials who enable the ethnic cleansing of the native British people.”

...

He admitted the Gab account was his.

So he's in court on the 19th Mar for the Soubry harassment stuff ... and in court in Manchester the next day for assault and a public order offence.

Yellow vest activist James Goddard charged with assault

Seems to be an habitual ****.

02-20-2019 , 05:13 PM

#14869

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

I don't think we should worship free speech in the american way but sure he can shout most stuff at a politician if he wants. No need to get so close that people might be concerned about their physical safety. That's not just speech, it's potentially harassment and/or intimidation.

Not just politicians of course. The police have to be able to step in before someone is physically assaulted. Primarily when it's hate speech which is rightly illegal.

02-21-2019 , 06:46 AM

#14870

O.A.F.K.1.1

Ted Patrick

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 27,952

I wonder how many people realise that the current drama's are only the beginning of the drama's and not the end (assuming a "deal" is done).

The current cluster ****ery is only over the preliminary agreement, there is plenty of hard work still to do over the exact nature and detail off an agreement. We are presently only discussing the deal about the deal.

02-21-2019 , 09:02 AM

#14871

[Phill]

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 52,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalfrezi

I am not defending harassment. That is my entire point.

We can discuss how ridiculous the current interpretation of free speech and hate speech in the uk thread is, if you want. The consistent trend is that if you attack the powerful and you are powerless you are prosecuted. If you attack the powerless and are powerful you are probably a journalist or a politician and maybe even tipped to be the next prime minister.

Two of the biggest examples, Charlie Hebdo = free speech, that idiot who trained his dog to do a nazi salute = hate speech.

02-21-2019 , 11:01 AM

#14872

Strontium Dog

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2018 Posts: 356

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

Charlie Hebdo - French publication but probably has a small circulation in UK so for the sake of argument...

If you're saying that printing cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad is hate speech then you must be all for blasphemy laws in general? I'm not and any religion that imposes their own beliefs on the world at large is a valid target for satire. Yes Charlie Hebdo = free speech.

And your second biggest example is a dog trained to do a nazi salute.
Man fined for hate crime after filming pug's 'Nazi salutes'
To flesh out the story a bit ...

Quote:

Fining Meechan £800, the sheriff told him: "The centrepiece of your video consists of you repeating the phrase 'Gas the Jews' over and over again as a command to a dog which then reacts.

"You use the command Sieg Heil, having trained the dog to raise its paw in response and the video shows a clip of a Nuremberg rally and a flashing image of Hitler with strident music. You say the video was only intended as a joke to upset your girlfriend, whose dog you used, and nothing more.

"On the whole evidence..I found it proved that the video you posted, using a public communications network, was grossly offensive and contained menacing, anti-Semitic and racist material."

So I'd say that's hate speech as defined by the laws of the UK - the sheriff certainly thought so.

02-21-2019 , 01:34 PM

#14873

numbersman

stranger

Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 7

I'm bullish on UK stocks. Every time the markets freak out thanks to full ****** politics news and quality companies are cheap I'm buying. Thanks for the discounts Vote Brexit!

02-21-2019 , 01:34 PM

#14874

jalfrezi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 12,234

Yeah, distilling that event to a dog's gestures is reductionist nonsense.

02-21-2019 , 03:04 PM

#14875

57 On Red

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 5,748

Quote:

Originally Posted by [Phill]

Public Order Act 1986 Section 4A, placing someone in fear by verbal or physical harassment.

Quote:

Intentional harassment, alarm or distress.

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he—

(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or

(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,

thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.

(5)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64

Your claim that 'this would be free speech in America' is ludicrous, and in any case the United States of America is not an example to follow. Your belief that the normal protections of the law should not apply to public servants, and that they should be harassed and intimidated at will by fascists, is rather obviously fascist.

Page 595 of 672

First

95 395 495 545 575 585 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 605 615 645

Last

...

Page 595 of 672

First

95 395 495 545 575 585 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 605 615 645

Last