Britain - The Official Thread

[Biggles]

[QUOTE="Dotini, post: 12266254, member: 100877"according to the below article..[/QUOTE]

Also, according to the award-winning documentary "A Grand Day Out" ...

... the moon is made of cheese.

 

[TexRex]

In what situations would you consider your definition of hate speech where context is not considered to be useful over one that does?

I don't propose any. Language used is language used, and the context in which it's used is relevant only to determine intent behind its use. The only way I can get on board with context informing the offensive nature of a word phrase is when it calls back to a specific event or usage, because the three words in question indeed are not offensive on their own. Unless you can come up with an instance where the combination used isn't offensive or controversial...

It makes it impossible to create a reasonable hate speech law if the offence literally includes all possible language.

I've heard some incredibly offensive things that didn't incorporate any particular language that presumed race, religion or sexual orientation. I don't believe they could have reasonably been considered incitement to act in a harmful or destructive manner (apart from harm to the users themselves as physical retaliation) or as defamation resulting in lost opportunities. Should such a thing be against the law because feelings were hurt? What makes hate speech special in that regard? I don't believe it should and I don't believe it is.

Can we be a little sensible and recognise that language is not entirely described purely by the words?

I'm not suggesting it is, I'm merely suggesting [as I've already established] that context informs intent rather than language used.

You could take the same words spoken in the Dankula video and say them in such a manner and with such footage behind that it would be unquestionably hate speech designed to incite.

Indeed context can be used to determine if there was intent to incite. Now, incitement to act in a harmful or destructive manner doesn't necessarily require hate speech, however I can see how establishing language used to incite as hate speech may affect the punishment brought down on the individual that used it to incite--not entirely unlike a firearm enhancement on a felony charge--though should an already criminally homicidal act such as your proposed loosening of gas lines be more criminal if a specific group is targeted? I'm given to understand that firearm enhancements are applied because of the inherent increase in likelihood of serious injury or death during the commission of the crime, and I'm not aware that Jewish people are more susceptible to carbon monoxide poisoning.

I want to know what word I would use to discuss my idea of hate speech with yourself or others like you.

If you truly choose to use "hate speech" to designate such a broad range of speech, what term would you use to refer to what I and others mean when we say "hate speech"?

"Hate speech" works just fine for me, but I really don't believe it to be so broad.



I'm not trying to be contrary, and I'm definitely not trying to shut down anyone using the language, as was previously suggested. While I don't think it's necessary, I'm certainly not offended by it.

 

[Imari]

"Hate speech" works just fine for me, but I really don't believe it to be so broad.

OK, so you're not really trying to have a discussion. If I have a different concept of hate speech to you and I want to make a clear delineation between your concept and mine when speaking, it's not unreasonable to try and come up with another term so that communication can be clear.

On the other hand, if you just want to confuse the issues then you might say "just use my word, it's fine". That way whenever someone uses the TexRex form of hate speech instead of the Imari form of hate speech you can fiddle around with the misunderstanding for a page or two.

What a waste of everyone's time when we could just speak clearly.

I'm not trying to be contrary, and I'm definitely not trying to shut down anyone using the language, as was previously suggested.

See what I just wrote above. You pretty much are just being contrary. You're suggesting using the same terminology for your idea of hate speech and mine, despite the difficulties in communicating when a single phrase means two similar but different things. Way to compromise and make sure people can communicate clearly...

You're not interested in discussion. If you were, then we'd pick another phrase for this alternate concept of hate speech and then move on to discussing the actual content. I'd pick one, but you've already staked your flag on what "hate speech" means so I'd rather you chose something that was acceptable to you rather than we do this all over again.

 

[Dotini]

[QUOTE="Dotini, post: 12266254, member: 100877"according to the below article..

Also, according to the award-winning documentary "A Grand Day Out" ...

View attachment 726141

... the moon is made of cheese.[/QUOTE]

Seriously, do you rejoice in the prospect of nuclear war? Perhaps, after all, it is for the best, since it would solve a lot of problems, end some old grudges, and we could all die content that we had done the right thing.
https://www.thenation.com/article/u...inst-trump-and-putin-are-risking-nuclear-war/

 

[TexRex]

I'd rather you chose something that was acceptable to you rather than we do this all over again.

Snurful; an amalgamation of snurf (a type of muppet) and awful (because I despise them).

I really don't think I was trying to make discussion more difficult, rather I suspect I didn't think my way of thinking is all that unconvential and therefor a special word was unnecessary. To tell true, I can see how I might have seen the request as condescending ("What do you call your wacko brand of hate speech?"), but it was late and I'd been drinking.

Is my perspective really that outlandish, though?

 

[Rage Racer]

So, Yulia Skripal woke up and can talk.
And yet they're telling us that she and her father were poisoned with a super-secret neurotoxin (owned by Russia ONLY) that is 5-10 times more lethal than VX (that killed Kim Jong Nam instantly). Does anyone still believe this?

A good old ice axe would be much more effective. Since 1940.

 

[TenEightyOne]

And yet they're telling us that she and her father were poisoned with a super-secret neurotoxin (owned by Russia ONLY) that is 5-10 times more lethal than VX (that killed Kim Jong Nam instantly). Does anyone still believe this?

Death depends on the dose and how quickly antidotes are administered. It doesn't matter if one believes or disbelieves which specific neurotoxin might have been used, survival can be an option.

 

[Rage Racer]

Death depends on the dose and how quickly antidotes are administered. It doesn't matter if one believes or disbelieves which specific neurotoxin might have been used, survival can be an option.

But the police now assumes that the poisoning occured at their home. And after that, they were walking for an hour, an even had a dinner in a restaurant. Pretty much time without an antidote, isn't it? Nerve agents normally act immediately.

Alright, the assasin(s) applied too little dose. But why? If this was a highly lethal poison, they intended to kill the target, and to do it surely. So they would probably use a proper dose. Or, by some miracle, something went wrong and most of the substance didn't reach the target?

Really, an ice axe would do it better.

 

[Dotini]

Really, an ice axe would do it better.

Wasn't Trotsky killed with an axe?

More to the point, the Brits ought to stop going ******* over small beer, and stop taking orders from the Don.

 

[Famine]

VX (that killed Kim Jong Nam instantly)

If you consider being alive and lucid long enough to seek help from security services, undergo treatment at the airport medical centre and be transferred to an ambulance, dying en route to the hospital, as "instantly", sure.

 

[TenEightyOne]

If you consider being alive and lucid long enough to seek help from security services, undergo treatment at the airport medical centre and be transferred to an ambulance, dying en route to the hospital, as "instantly", sure.

Really, an ice axe would do it better.

Trotsky lived even longer than Kim Jong Nam after Jacson/Mercader beaned him with the ice pick.

 

[Rage Racer]

Wasn't Trotsky killed with an axe?

Yes, the reference was to him.

If you consider being alive and lucid long enough to seek help from security services, undergo treatment at the airport medical centre and be transferred to an ambulance, dying en route to the hospital, as "instantly", sure.

Oh, my mistake about dying.
But I mean, the poison acted very quickly after being applied, and he didn't walk and eat after inhaling a dose of an organophosphorus compound.

Trotsky lived even longer than Kim Jong Nam after Jacson/Mercader beaned him with the ice pick.

But still, the job was done more successfully than using the "super-secret, extremely lethal, Russian-exclusive Novichok" agent.
An ice pick is easily available from a store and wouldn't hurt random people around.

 

[Famine]

But I mean, the poison acted very quickly after being applied, and he didn't walk and eat after inhaling a dose of an organophosphorus compound.

He very much did walk, and for quite a period of time. He alerted the airport's security staff and went to the airport medical centre before he lost consciousness.


Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova is currently claiming that the Skripal poisoning is part of a plan by "the West" (USA and UK) to prevent Russia from holding the World Cup:

"It's my impression that all they care about is taking the World Cup out of Russia. They will use any means. Their minds are only on that football and God forbid it should touch a Russian football field."

I'd suggest that three months before the event is a bit too late to be doing that sort of thing - few countries have the existing infrastructure to take over to host a World Cup with this short notice. They should have done it two years ago at least, if that was the goal.

I'd also point out that the USA hasn't even qualified for the World Cup, and football is about eighth on its list of priority sports anyway, so it's not like it's a nation with "minds only on that football". Also, the Olympics were a little bit more significant an event - the World Cup might be the largest global single-sport event, but it's no Olympics.

 

[Dennisch]

The Russian ambassador in London is now blaming the British secret service for the attack.

 

[Dotini]

The Russian ambassador in London is now blaming the British secret service for the attack.

Obviously it's time to cut diplomatic relations with Russia, send the ambassador packing, declare war and launch every missile you have. Particularly if he has any evidence. I have it on good authority that Hillary has given her reset button to Theresa should anything go wrong.

 

[Dennisch]

The British experts can't confirm that the Novichock used in the attack came from Russia.

Good job blaming Russia then.

 

[Dotini]

From Antiwar.com, a libertarian website.

Britain Can’t Prove Russia Behind Poisoning, Still Talks Retaliation
Scientists can't say where poison came from
Jason Ditz Posted on April 3, 2018Categories NewsTags Britain, Russia


Weeks of repeatedly blaming the Russian government for the Salisbury poisonings is starting to look pretty embarrassing for the British government. Today, scientists at Porton Down said they were unable to say where the poison actually came from.

That’s a big problem, as British officials have long insisted that the poison was Russian in origin. The scientists would only say it was “probably” from some state actor, but even this was not certain. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is also running tests, though results are not expected for some time.

British officials, of course, are undeterred in their accusations, and a spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May talked openly about Britain’s desire to retaliate in some “proportionate” way to the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter.

This raises questions of its own, above and beyond the obvious problem that they can’t prove Russia did anything. It’s not clear what would amount to a “proportionate” response in the eyes of the British government, which has already caused myriad diplomatic problems through expulsions.

These comments indicate that Britain feels everything they’ve already done isn’t enough, though it is risky for them to try to do much more, with Western relations with Russia already at a post-Cold War low, and getting worse all the time.
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/04/03...sia-behind-poisoning-still-talks-retaliation/

 

[Liquid]

The British experts can't confirm that the Novichock used in the attack came from Russia.

Good job blaming Russia then.

Boris Johnson said a while ago that the lab who were testing the nerve agent gave him assurances that it was of Russian origin

...before the lab came out yesterday and announced that it couldn't be determined. 💡

 

[HenrySwanson]

What's everyone's thoughts on the violence we're seeing in London at the moment (currently worse than NY for first time ever)?

May's fault?
Khan?

 

[TheCracker]

What's everyone's thoughts on the violence we're seeing in London at the moment (currently worse than NY for first time ever)?

May's fault?
Khan?

It's a bit of a stretch to pin it squarely on either the mayor or the PM, as it appears to be related to east European drugs/guns/people trafficking gangs.

Underfunded border forces? Underfunded Police force? Poor levels of education in deprived areas? The EU Schengen Agreement? Brexit? I'm sure there's an argument for each and every one.

 

[Moglet]

What's everyone's thoughts on the violence we're seeing in London at the moment (currently worse than NY for first time ever)?

May's fault?
Khan?

I've seen it reported as murders, not violent crime overall.

For all of 2018 New York's murder rate is still overall higher, however London has had a few more murders over the last few months and it's true that the rate in London does seem to be increasing. It seems that the media are carefully choosing which statistics to use when reporting with this sort of headline in order to make it seem more dramatic than it actually is.

This is an interesting read: Reality Check: Has London's murder rate overtaken New York's?

 

[HenrySwanson]

It's a bit of a stretch to pin it squarely on either the mayor or the PM, as it appears to be related to east European drugs/guns/people trafficking gangs.

Underfunded border forces? Underfunded Police force? Poor levels of education in deprived areas? The EU Schengen Agreement? Brexit? I'm sure there's an argument for each and every one.

I hadn't heard about this? I presumed it was more black on black/gang crime responsible.

I've seen it reported as murders, not violent crime overall.

For all of 2018 New York's murder rate is still overall higher, however London has had a few more murders over the last few months and it's true that the rate in London does seem to be increasing. It seems that the media are carefully choosing which statistics to use when reporting with this sort of headline in order to make it seem more dramatic than it actually is.

This is an interesting read: Reality Check: Has London's murder rate overtaken New York's?

Will give it a look, thanks

 

[TheCracker]

I hadn't heard about this? I presumed it was more black on black/gang crime responsible.

It seems to be that. Well, gangs from areas with diverse populations. But it's "fuelled by" the East European gangs.

 

[UKMikey]

I should've put this fluffy publicity puff piece in the Funny News Story thread but I'm not sure non-British readers would get the joke.

Venerable Scottish comic The Beano sends Jacob Rees-Mogg cease and desist letter.

I'll give the Tory hopeful credit for his self deprecatingly humorous reply.

 

[Touring Mars]

^ That's great!

On a sadder note, British darts legend Eric Bristow has died aged 60...

R.I.P. Eric

 

[TexRex]

British darts legend Eric Bristow has died aged 60...

R.I.P. Eric

Did one ricochet?




















Sorry.

 

[Famine]

On a sadder note, British darts legend Eric Bristow has died aged Treble 20...

Although I always thought you had to check out on a double...

 

[Liquid]

20 double top.

Not a huge fan of him as a person but I did always like Sid Waddell's commentary of him:

When Alexander of Macedon was 33, he cried salt tears because there were no more worlds to conquer... Eric Bristow is only 27!

 

[Liquid]

How crap is the nerve agent used on the Skripals that they're not only not dead but also recovering?

Unless it's only in films that nerve agents are super deadly 100% of the time.

 

[UKMikey]

How crap is the nerve agent used on the Skripals that they're not only not dead but also recovering?

Unless it's only in films that nerve agents are super deadly 100% of the time.

It kind of lends precedence to the false flag theory, presuming that the Russians would've got it right first time.

I'm glad the Skripals are going to make it. Too bad their pets didn't. They are the real casualties of this attack.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ea-pigs-die-police-sealed-house-salisbury-spy