Rayvin

Makes a difference to you though. Increasingly I think that's all we can do, stand up for what we believe in just for our own sake.

I personally feel nowhere near enough is made out of Farage's past either tbh.

I was reading just before that the reason in particular Israel have sort of walked into this one is because Netanyahu refuses to launch an independent inquiry into the initial attack by Hamas, fearing it will expose him as being responsible for security failures. Had he done this, the arrest warrant wouldn't have been issued as the ICC would have entrusted the process to Israel's courts. He will have known this, so he clearly has something to hide. I think it's clear anyway that the focus of this war has switched from defeating Hamas to expanding Israeli land though.

I would also add that whether they voted for it or not, we democratically decided to make the country poorer. That impacts all of us. This is just a way that it will now impact them. No one escapes Brexit induced poverty whether they deserve it or not.

In fairness, I don't consider JOB to be a very honest debater most of the time in general and I do agree with your point there. It feels like the guy is basically saying that if the value of his land is over the threshold he's going to have to summon up a large amount of money from essentially nowhere against a 30k pa wage in order to keep it 'as is'. So I do sort of understand that. I would argue perhaps a better way of doing this would be to tax it at point of sale. Whenever the land is sold, it is taxed an appropriate level to compensate for having avoided inheritance tax. That said, Labour seem to be arguing that this isn't going to impact the vast majority of farmers so I'm not sure if this bloke would even be affected.

I can't help but feel that farmers sort of deserve whatever this is about after Brexit... but this one at least seems fucking angry

Absolutely spot on.

I'd prefer you didn't go mate, if that's worth anything. Even I get piled on in politics chat sometimes - that said, it's worth understanding that most of this forum is made up of lefties who are fucking angry at the world. Whether you agree or not, our vision of how things are is intensely bleak and getting worse by the day.

Normally I don't think I'd bother but I didn't have TDS down as this sort of poster - and I felt that maybe it was an honest enquiry and that perhaps some resistance to Musk's bullshit might be all that was needed. I fail to appreciate of course that everyone already has their opinion set in stone before anything is said. I was kind of interested myself in why it had happened though.

That's not me arguing this issue. That's me earnestly wanting an asteroid to wipe me out before Musk's banal idiocy ruins the entire Western world. Maybe I can find a hotel to be burned alive in the next time the sub 80 IQs gather.

Kill me now. We're all fucking doomed.

Mate, I've really tried but you're not interested in my reasoning. Fair enough, but you've got nothing to say on this in response other than refusing to acknowledge this issue on the level of detail that would be necessary to form any sort of judgement. So I'm done with this now.

The one on the shorter sentence is being released apparently - from what I can see he didn't actually carry out the violence which is presumably why. He got the manslaughter charge seemingly because he supplied the weapon to the guy who did (the longer sentence). That's my reading of it anyway. Why the fuck I've spent so much time on this is beyond me, but what is clear is that there are a lot of details to this that Musk and friends are willfully ignoring to be able to whip up hysteria.

If it was that simple, I would say no. But then I don't consider it that simple whatsoever, so again, I feel the question isn't relevant. Two months for inciting a riot that could have led to people being killed and mass violence if strong action wasn't taken (and those people were warned in real time but continued their stupidity anyway) versus a teenager stabbing a guy in the hand during a scuffle between two gangs (where the perpetrator's gang was the one being pursued) and unfortunately nicking a major blood vessel. Taking all the details out makes it sound bad, but honestly isn't a remotely fair way of interpreting it. It lacks all context. EDIT - actually the more i look at it, the more I feel like the guy who is being released was only actually responsible for sourcing the machete, not the actual killing blow or associated violence. I'm not positive on that but it appears to be what the court notes are saying. So it's 6 months for buying a machete that he knew would likely be used in violence.

But for the record, I trust the judges to know what is right or not based on their experience interpreting the law, and not random people on the internet with no information/evidence/data about it.