REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

The Brit Thread

POSTED BY: PEACEKEEPER
UPDATED: Monday, October 29, 2012 13:32
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4959
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, October 5, 2012 4:09 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Just to take some attention away from the US election bandwagon, here's some news from the other side of the pond.

1.Two woman police officers have been murdered near Manchester, while answering a supposedly routine burglary report.Turns out that James Cregan called them up, and as soon as they knocked on his door, he mowed them down with a hail of bullets and a home made grenade. He.of course, is gang affiliated and this was his statement to prove his machismo. The young officers were 23 and 32 years old respectively.
Their funerals were held on two consecutive days in Manchester cathedral, and the people of Manchester lined the streets in their thousands to pay their respects.
This has of course raised the issue of arming our police force, but the general view seems to be as always. We don't want to be America, and we want our police service to act with public consent and not armed coercion.


2.A 5 year old girl has been abducted from a small town in Wales., and She was seen getting into a van at 7.30pm and has been missing for nearly a week.A man has been arrested on suspicion of her abduction, and police are close to giving up hope of finding her alive.This has raised the questions of "What the hell was a 5year old girl doing playing outside during hours of darkness and reinforces the fact that even tiny one horse towns aren't safe anymore either.


3.Jimmy Saville, who was a long term and well liked radio and TV personality, has been accused by a number of women of rape and sexual assault, despite the fact that he has been dead for a year.This raises the question of how moral is it to wait until somebody's demise before making such accusations. Even if true, it cant be proved and he cant defend himself.




























NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 5, 2012 4:19 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I read about your missing girl. I hope she is found alive and unharmed

We had a recent murder here that has sparked major tv coverage, where a young woman was adbucted, raped and murdered just minutes from her home. There was a week of hope for her as well, even though the circumstances looked as ominous as they turned out to be.

It's been interesting to me how much attention this sad event has received, partially because she was young and beautiful, worked for the media, partially because it was an area frequented by middle class educated people (as opposed to some suburban slum where violence is more common place), and partially because she chose to walk home in the early hours of the morning, promting a lot of victim blaming from parts of the social media in particular.

The other interesting part is that Facebook has come in for some heavy criticism, because of allowing sites to publish preducial material which may hinder the trial of the man alleged to have been responsible.

Also worth noting that his capture and the discovery of her body was mainly due to the CCTV in a local shop which has recording events moments before her abduction.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/enjoy-the-craic-but-tears-intrude-as
-jill-is-laid-to-rest-20121005-274wi.html


PK it seems a bit harsh about Jimmy Saville. Why did they not come forward before his death?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 5, 2012 4:19 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by peacekeeper:
Turns out that James Cregan called them up, and as soon as they knocked on his door, he mowed them down with a hail of bullets and a home made grenade.
This has of course raised the issue of arming our police force, but the general view seems to be as always. We don't want to be America, and we want our police service to act with public consent and not armed coercion.

Ummm, if they were armed, how would that have helped them? I don't get the connection. Sad for the two officers though.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 5, 2012 4:34 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Looks like police no longer expect the find April alive

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/05/april-jones-search-murder-inq
uiry

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 5, 2012 5:55 PM

CHRISISALL


*sad*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 6, 2012 2:25 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Magons---The same question has been asked here concerning the guy arrested. No details of why he has been arrested have been released, and they have had to apply for an extension to hold him for questioning.Now, the issue is for me,I thought a man was innocent until proven guilty.Yet his name and picture have been plastered all over the media.If he is proved to be guilty,then I will throw my tomatoes at his stocks with the rest of them. But I believe that nobody should be outed UNTIL they are proven guilty.
We had a case a while ago, where hospital patients were dying by being given wrong medication, apparently deliberately.They arrested a young nurse and gave her extensive media interest, only to be found that she was innocent of all charges. How that girls life must have been ruined. How is it in other parts of the world???

As for Jimmy Saville, he was a major fundraiser at Stoke Mandeville Hospital for the disabled.And I think that he had a lot of friends in high places. Thus, these women felt that their accusations would have been quashed by the powers that be. But to me, if enough people come forward with these complaints, they cannot be ignored. Waiting until he is dead is completely pointless and also relates rto the above point.



Chrisisall----I think the issue is with the armed police point is, maybe if they had been armed they could have returned fire.But, I agree, what chance did they have.Anyway, I think it is widely accepted that the gun control argument is something that is never going to be given any real consideration in this country.Our culture is just too ingrained against the use of guns.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 6, 2012 2:43 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by PEACEKEEPER:
Chrisisall----I think the issue is with the armed police point is, maybe if they had been armed they could have returned fire.But, I agree, what chance did they have.Anyway, I think it is widely accepted that the gun control argument is something that is never going to be given any real consideration in this country.Our culture is just too ingrained against the use of guns.



Except that the two officers were killed with a gun.

Also wonder if the "Wot's all this, then." philosophy - that folks will defer to police in most all instances - made the officers a bit less careful and aware.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 6, 2012 5:27 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Gawd, PK AND Magons, hearing that your countries are going the way of ours (tho' we are unquestionably way ahead of you at this point) really saddens me. Is it that way in the rest of the world, too? Depressing.

I agree with the gun thing. They wouldn't have had a chance whether they were armed or not, and resisting arming the whole populace is, in my opinion, a good thing. There will be instances like these and, horrible as they are, I think there will always be fewer of them than here. There will ALWAYS be fewer people offing one another out of momentary rage, I believe, too. You guys have the right mentality, and as long as the police aren't armed, a country whose mentality is to respect the police (at least MORE than here) is worth keeping...for as long as you can anyway.

While I also know that abductions, sexual violence and murders happen everywhere, it also saddens me to hear of them happening over there. Over here we're used to it--as much as anyone can be--and accept it as a fact of life. I know such things happen all over the world, but I hate being reminded of it.

On a totally unrelated subject, what do you guys think of Dr. Who moving to America? Dunno if it's a real "move", have heard about it and seen the recent episodes, but personally I worry about DW becoming more "Americanized", if you will. Some things are best left alone, and we've "stolen" so many of your icons, who have moved to LaLaLand, that I'm wary as hell.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 6, 2012 5:56 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Never really been a huge DW fan tbh.I always found it a little second rate as a sci-fi project.perhaps moving it to America will make it a little better with the increased production budget.But I understand what you're saying about nicking our icons. I notice that Sherlock Holmes has been Americanised with "Elementary". Sherlock in New York????Not to sure about that. And if you EVER try to steal 007 from us, there will be Redcoats marching through Washington with bayonets drawn!!!!

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 6, 2012 12:39 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Gawd, PK AND Magons, hearing that your countries are going the way of ours (tho' we are unquestionably way ahead of you at this point) really saddens me. Is it that way in the rest of the world, too? Depressing.

I agree with the gun thing. They wouldn't have had a chance whether they were armed or not, and resisting arming the whole populace is, in my opinion, a good thing. There will be instances like these and, horrible as they are, I think there will always be fewer of them than here. There will ALWAYS be fewer people offing one another out of momentary rage, I believe, too. You guys have the right mentality, and as long as the police aren't armed, a country whose mentality is to respect the police (at least MORE than here) is worth keeping...for as long as you can anyway.

While I also know that abductions, sexual violence and murders happen everywhere, it also saddens me to hear of them happening over there. Over here we're used to it--as much as anyone can be--and accept it as a fact of life. I know such things happen all over the world, but I hate being reminded of it.

On a totally unrelated subject, what do you guys think of Dr. Who moving to America? Dunno if it's a real "move", have heard about it and seen the recent episodes, but personally I worry about DW becoming more "Americanized", if you will. Some things are best left alone, and we've "stolen" so many of your icons, who have moved to LaLaLand, that I'm wary as hell.




There has always been violent crime here, Niki. I don't think anything has changed much. Abduction type murders are still rare enough to attract a lot of media attention, but violence is commonplace in other ways, especially amongst and against young men as well as high statistics for family violence.

Regarding Doctor Who, I am exposed to this through my son (was a big fan back in the day) - and have no problems with the recent settings in the US. If they made him an American in a future incarnation, I'd have a problem, but as long as the show is basically British in flavour I don't mind.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 7, 2012 12:09 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by PEACEKEEPER:
I think the issue is with the armed police point is, maybe if they had been armed they could have returned fire.But, I agree, what chance did they have.Anyway, I think it is widely accepted that the gun control argument is something that is never going to be given any real consideration in this country.Our culture is just too ingrained against the use of guns.


And yanno, this might sound strange comin from me, but I don't see a problem with that.
See, the problem with a lotta Americans, although not limited to them alas, is a lack of understanding OF other cultures, combined with the jackass assumption that theirs is somehow superior, it's ridiculous.

Now, personally I think Y'all have gone just slightly overboard in regards to criminalizing self-defense (which has nothing to do with guns save as one of the many possible tools to use) and that has had some backlash effect and incidently further enabled and abetted the criminal element - but I feel the introduction of firearms wholesale into your society would do it absolutely no favors whatever, it'd be a bloody disaster, pun intended.

Whereas over here, you couldn't possibly REMOVE them from the equation, all you wind up doing is disarming one "side", generally the better one, and said imbalance of power results very quickly in bloodshed and mayhem - cause we're NOT a sane society, not really... PRETENDING otherwise, PRETENDING it has anything to do with the guns themselves, is just another offshoot of that insanity, and till we get a handle on it, those of us who might find themselves face to face with the ugly underside of our screwed up little world better their own chances with a firearm, even if they never actually have to pull the trigger.

Consider the American mentality on a global scale - Got nukes, got a real military.. okay we'll negotiate.
Got no nukes, weak military, few weapons... YOUR ASS BELONGS TO US!
Now scale that down to a single city block, that exact same fucking mentality, and that's America.
Which is why we NEED those firearms, you see ?

If that's ever gonna change, we need to get some sanity into society FIRST, BEFORE trying to take the weapons out.
Otherwise we're just handing easy victims on a plate over to the worst elements of that society.
So it's everything to do with culture, and little to do with the item itself.

And I do feel ya about Americ-o-centrism or what have you, right now I am cheesed off about how little attention a certain other matter has gotten, like we don't even fucking NOTICE any more, grrrr.
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2012/09/16/nato-accused-of-killing-8-a
fghan-women-in-airstrike.html

At least CD picked it up, nice words, but in the end, just words.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/10/05-1
We need more than words, we need to get the hell OUT of there, support the Afgans in solving their own problems, instead of trying to issue decrees by way of the gun, it doesn't work.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:33 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Hope I'm not thread hijacking, PK.

Here is our own version of your right winged not job commentator - radio 'personality' Alan Jones, who has recently caused a furore over comments made about the recently deceased father of the PM.

Moron.

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/sponsors-drop-alan-jo
nes-after-attack-on-pm-20121001-26ugl.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 7, 2012 8:57 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Not thread jacking at all Magons.It's nice to know that the rest of The World does exist.After reading the article,he strikes me as a wannabe comedian trying to make political commentary, and has fallen way short of the mark. Insensitive to say the least, but I don't think any disrespect was intended to the deceased. But he looks like a bit of a wanker.!!!???


Frem----I've been one for slagging off your gun culture in the past , tbh. But I suppose if it's in you, it's in you??? The thought of taking guns from you is just as abhorrent as forcing them on us. I don't like it, but hey, it's your arse at the end of the day.

And Geezer, an obvious point, but they were killed by a dickhead from an unaceptable subculture.He is not part of mainstream society and we do not pander to the scumbag few by turning ourselves into an armed state, thank you!!!

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 7:29 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by PEACEKEEPER:
Chrisisall----I think the issue is with the armed police point is, maybe if they had been armed they could have returned fire.But, I agree, what chance did they have.Anyway, I think it is widely accepted that the gun control argument is something that is never going to be given any real consideration in this country.Our culture is just too ingrained against the use of guns.



Except that the two officers were killed with a gun.



Wha...? This is the kind of argument Wulfenstar would make. Aha, a single instance of gun crime! Gun control has completely failed!!!

The UK has about 50 gun murders a year. Compare that to the USA's 9000... I'd say UK-style gun control works pretty well.

Quote:

Also wonder if the "Wot's all this, then." philosophy - that folks will defer to police in most all instances - made the officers a bit less careful and aware.

Lol, never heard of the "Wot's all this, then." philosophy. This whole point to me, is a bizarre conjecture. Americans and their views of Britain/Europe...

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 7:38 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I think Y'all have gone just slightly overboard in regards to criminalizing self-defense

There's no criminalisation of self-defence. If you fear you're in mortal danger use whatever force you think you have to. If you kill your assailant the police might question you and investigate to corroborate your story, but you won't be charged.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 10:49 AM

AGENTROUKA


In connection to the tragic case of the missing little girl:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-19869710

Quote:

A Lancashire man who posted offensive comments on Facebook about missing five-year-old April Jones has been jailed for 12 weeks.

Matthew Woods, 20, made a number of derogatory posts about April and missing Madeline McCann.

He appeared at Chorley Magistrates' Court where he admitted sending a grossly offensive public electronic communication.



I thought this was disturbing. Apparently, in Britain, you go to jail for free speech? I mean, I don't know what he posted and I do not want to defend it, but... it just seems extreme to send someone to jail over that. Who decides what is grossly offensive?

Am I missing something?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 11:28 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Because it was published directly after the event,is emotionally raw,is something that has shocked a nation, has no consideration for the girl's family,has no basis in decency or morality, and is directly aimed at slandering a helpless 5 year old girl, who has possibly been traumatised beyond all understanding before she died(even though no body has been found, so that is a presumption.) Maybe harsh in the cold light of day, but at this moment in time, it's probably better than some hate mob going round and cutting the little pricks throat.
Personally I welcome the fact that being an anonymous hate inducing little troll with no respect for the consequences of your actions CAN be subject to a wider moral sanction. Some things are surely unacceptable,no matter what cultural freedoms you may have. I'm not sure jail is the right way to go, but I certainly agree with some kind of public shaming and re-education in the field of moral responsibility.
One of these days, I'd quite like to see PN be subject to a similar course of action.!!!!!!






With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 1:00 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


No, you're not missing anything Rouka, that's how it is - the right to free speech (of the nasty variety)is not as respected here as in America. I personally find this kind of example quite worrying; I don't think the slope is as slippery as some here would probably argue, but I thought our principles of free-speech were stronger than this. In any case I think a twelve week jail term is ridiculous. I would limit the punishment for this kind of offense to a fine, probably just for the most extreme cases.

Quote:

Who decides what is grossly offensive?

There's probably a complex legal definition.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 1:18 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


More UK news, Bedford couple unwittingly grow mammoth cannabis plant

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-19868327

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 7:51 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Fuck me, that is huge. But how in God's name has it got that size in our very inclement weather. I thought they needed heat and light for cultivation???

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 10:54 PM

AGENTROUKA


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
No, you're not missing anything Rouka, that's how it is - the right to free speech (of the nasty variety)is not as respected here as in America. I personally find this kind of example quite worrying; I don't think the slope is as slippery as some here would probably argue, but I thought our principles of free-speech were stronger than this. In any case I think a twelve week jail term is ridiculous. I would limit the punishment for this kind of offense to a fine, probably just for the most extreme cases.

Quote:

Who decides what is grossly offensive?

There's probably a complex legal definition.

It's not personal. It's just war.



Thanks for the replies, PK and KPO.

It's not that I think this sort of horrible public comment should be without consequences or even, necessarily, beyond the reach of legal action. But the jail term does seem, to me, frighteningly extreme.

I looked up the law under which he was charged, the Communications Act of 2003, Section 127.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents

Quote:

127 Improper use of public electronic communications network

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
(b)causes such a message to be sent; or
(c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.
(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.
(4)Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to anything done in the course of providing a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)).



It just strikes me as so incredibly vague. Yes, what PN posts is disgusting, but I would never want to send him to jail over it.

If the guy had been specifically charged with slander or something pertaining directly to the victim and her family, something that specified a personal attack, which it appears to have been, if indirectly, I would feel less comfortable about this, but it appears that this law essentially responds to solely public sensitivity, which is incredibly subjective.

And even so, a fine should, in my eyes, be the full extend of the punishment. Jail time up to six months? For saying rude shit online? What about that bullshit Anti-Mohammed film, wouldn't that be considered grossly offensive by a large number of people? Would that be subject to jail time all by itself?



And I don't mean to imply that Britain is an unfree country with no regard for free speech or any general extrapolation of that sort. I was just startled by this specific thing and wanted to bring it up.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 8, 2012 11:40 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


I agree that the law is subjective.I'm sure that in a month or so, Sikipedia will be publishing jokes of that ilk and face no legal consequence whatsoever.
I don't know how it is elsewhere, but it seems that we are a nation that often gets through adversity by sticking up two fingers to it all and makes a big joke out of pretty much anything. I think this has been so harshly judged, because some subjects SHOULD always be taboo, particularly while the event is still unfolding, and on this occasion my first reaction is to praise the law for stamping it out.But I do see where you are coming from.
There are silly interpretations of law wherever you go in the world.I can remember a case not too long ago where a couple of Brits texts were intercepted where they were saying they were in America to "blow it to hell". The US authorities, not understanding the cultural slang for "partying", took it literally and threw them out of the airport straight back on the next plane.
But, when you consider the events that led to such paranoia, who are we to judge it.But I don't think there is any ambiguity than can be lodged in the respect of the above case.




With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:22 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


PK, one of the things I've always loved about DW is that it's SUPPOSED to be corny...and has held up its end excellently on that score. I wouldn't be caught dead watching "Elementary" because I'm offended that they're trying to Americanize it...and don't get me STARTED on Bond. Doll, he's been bought and paid for, long since hollywoodized and Americanized. I mean, Timothy Dalton, for heaven's sake? Being Brit isn't, in my opinion, all it takes to be Bond!

Magons, I know there's violence the world over, it's contemplating that while
Quote:

Abduction type murders are still rare enough to attract a lot of media attention
NOW, I'm guessing you're on the way to being like us, where they're common enough that they only get local attention, if that. Saddens me immeasurably.

As to DW being "Americanized", yeah--thus far, for me at least, keeping the characters Brit has been sufficient, and I'm praying they don't ever try to bring him back as a Yank after one of his regenerations. That would piss me off big time!

As an aside, it was an on-line Ozzie friend of long standing who introduced me to Torchwood--the offshoot of DW--and I THOROUGHLY enjoyed it for its short-lived incarnation (especially as James Marsters did some great guest spots...sigh...). Wish they'd do more...

As to the guns thing, I think Frem nailed it all the way down the line! We're stuck with how we began, with the Wild West mentality and our start as an insurrection, but I wouldn't wish it on any other country! Many of us would like it to be otherwise, but history molds societies, so it goes.

I, too, find the punishment for that guy worrying...if anything had to be done, a fine would be the most I would like to see. Apparently you guys AREN'T as obsessive about free speech as over here. In some respects I like that, as there are things such as the one you described which I don't think should just be allowed, but given the example, which I feel is way over the top, I guess I'd rather have our free speech, much as it pisses me off frequently.

As to the marijuana bush, what a lovely bush; can you blame the couple for growing it? Cannabis plants are quite lovely by themselves, too bad their product is forbidden. And it's a weed; it'll grow just about anywhere. Which is on reason Humboldt Gold does so well...that's temperate rainforest up there, lotsa fog and much cooler temps than down here, but it grows just great nonetheless.

(Thanx for bringing us something we can discuss outside our own political circus for a change, PK!)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:58 AM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Quote;PK, one of the things I've always loved about DW is that it's SUPPOSED to be corny...and has held up its end excellently on that score. I wouldn't be caught dead watching "Elementary" because I'm offended that they're trying to Americanize it...and don't get me STARTED on Bond. Doll, he's been bought and paid for, long since hollywoodized and Americanized. I mean, Timothy Dalton, for heaven's sake? Being Brit isn't, in my opinion, all it takes to be Bond!


I have to disagree my lovely.Being a Brit is THE main consideration for being Bond.Mr Dalton wasn't the greatest incarnation, I grant you, and Mr Lazenby bombed like a Zeppelin partly because he wasn't British.Brosnan at least pretended to be a Brit(he is in fact an Irishman).But I would rather have a third rate Brit than a first rate Yank anyday. I know MGM et al provide much of the capital, but it is always produced at Pinewood and that shouldn't change for love nor money. I think an American Bond would KILL the franchise.

It's not just Elementary being in New York that is bothering me.It's the choice of Johnny Lee Miller as Sherlock that is a shocking piece of casting.He is just NOT the man for the job.What next, Justin Bieber in Downton Abbey???.Speaking of which, THAT is a fantastic piece of British Drama that has benefitted immensely from a US input.



With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:04 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Justin Bieber in Downton Abbey?



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:10 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


With reference to the Jimmy Saville debate, the FAMILY have now removed his headstone from his grave to "Respect Public Opinion" and his charitable trust, which has made millions of pounds for disabled charities over 40years of work, are now changing their name to reflect public opinion. I find this SO troubling that a man's name can be maligned so tragically on hearsay. This is not justice under any circumstance. If these allegations were true, and I'm not saying they aren't, surely they cant be allowed after a man has died and been buried for so long.
I find it all very disturbing.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:15 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh gawd, PK, that is TRULY awful! To have all that result from nothing but innuendo, to appease "public opinion", makes me just want to...well, shit, on second thought it's no surprise, is it? The trust can no doubt garner more contributions without his name, and I suppose the gravestone can be put back up after it all dies down. But the principle of the thing just sickens me.

I guess in stuff like this you guys are no beter than us...I imagine that nonprofit Sandusky worked with is trying to find ways to distance itself from him, too.

Sometimes I despair of all humanity...often, actually...

(you changed the name of this, didn't you, stinker? Confused me, it did, and I don't need no more confusion than I already got!) ;o)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:31 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


I thought the name change might garner a bit more interest from fellow contributors from my side of the puddle.Perhaps it could be a permanent thread for us. And plus the fact, I had to take your name from the thread to "Reflect Public Opinion"!!!!!. {And you knows that a joke, my love.lol)

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 7:01 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by peacekeeper:
With reference to the Jimmy Saville debate, the FAMILY have now removed his headstone from his grave to "Respect Public Opinion" and his charitable trust, which has made millions of pounds for disabled charities over 40years of work, are now changing their name to reflect public opinion. I find this SO troubling that a man's name can be maligned so tragically on hearsay. This is not justice under any circumstance. If these allegations were true, and I'm not saying they aren't, surely they cant be allowed after a man has died and been buried for so long.
I find it all very disturbing.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.



From what I have read about Saville, the fact that he was a sexual preditor of very young girls was widely known and accepted in the showbiz community, who must have done a bit of a Catholic Church in keeping quiet and covering up. Now I think that is the interesting story, why this behaviour was left unchecked and unreported.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 7:05 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:

Magons, I know there's violence the world over, it's contemplating that while
Quote:

Abduction type murders are still rare enough to attract a lot of media attention
NOW, I'm guessing you're on the way to being like us, where they're common enough that they only get local attention, if that. Saddens me immeasurably.




I don't think we're on our way to being like you, per se, as much as your country demonstrates what can happen when societies get too large, inequity becomes too great and you have in place some pretty zany gun laws (or lack of them).

I think levels of violence in countries is a complex thing to explore, so it isn't just about descending to the level of the US, whatever that might be, but looking at what are the factors involved that reduce/increase violent crime.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 11, 2012 6:48 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I hear what you're saying and it's pretty much what I was thinking:
Quote:

demonstrates what can happen when societies get too large, inequity becomes too great and you have in place some pretty zany gun laws (or lack of them).

Amen.

PK, rather than a Brit thread, I just wish more people from outside the U.S. would just pop up now and again and give us news from their country. I for one would certainly read it! At any rate, since BBC News is one of the sites I have bookmarked and wander over to in order to try and find interesting threads, I'll try to do so more often--I, like others, have been too obsessed by our own idiocy recently to check out all my "sources" regularly.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 11, 2012 8:52 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Speaking of which, and again on the subject of free speech in the U.K.:
Quote:

Barry Thew jailed for T-shirt mocking PCs' deaths

A man from Greater Manchester who wore a T-shirt daubed with offensive comments about the killing of two police officers has been jailed.


Thew was arrested wearing the T-shirt hours after the PCs were killed

Barry Thew, 39, was arrested wearing the top with the words "one less pig perfect justice" hours after the deaths of PCs Fiona Bone and Nicola Hughes.

He admitted a public order offence and was jailed for four months at Minshull Street Crown Court in Manchester.

Insp Bryn Williams said after the case that the T-shirt had been "appalling".

A police spokesman said Thew, of Worsley Street, Radcliffe, had been arrested after being seen wearing the T-shirt in Radcliffe town centre "just hours" after the constables died in a gun and grenade attack in Mottram on 18 September.

Mr Williams said: "While officers on the ground were just learning of and trying to come to terms with the devastating news that two colleagues had been killed, Thew thought nothing of going out in public with a shirt daubed with appalling handwritten comments on." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-19911943


Seems there IS quite a difference between our Constitutionally-protected right to free speech and what free speech is "legal" across the Pond. I can't imagine anybody ever being arrested for a t-shirt over here, however offensive. Not just "not as respected", as you wrote earlier, but not even LEGAL apparently!

What is this "public order offence"?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 13, 2012 1:10 AM

OONJERAH


Scottish independence referendum: PM expects to sign deal next week

Agreement will give Scottish parliament legal power to stage 'yes or no'
referendum on whether Scotland should stay in UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/oct/10/scottish-independence-r
eferendum-pm-deal

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 13, 2012 12:26 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Niki,it's a public order offence because it is a deliberate act to cause distress in a public place.If the police did nothing about this, then chances are it could have caused a public disturbance.I for one would not have walked past him without pulling his spleen out via his arsehole. So rather than allow a public disturbance to take place, they took him off the street. The concepts of free speech differ immensely between our cultures, that is obvious.
It's a difficult one to judge, I grant you, and I see your problem. Maybe we aren't as free and accepting as our US counterparts, but I don't have a problem with this one.Any sane, respectful person wouldn't dream of parading such a T-Shirt in public.

Oonj, The Scots are welcome to have a referendum on their future, but it's a total sham. The Scots will never go for it.It's a huge step and there is no need for it. The Scots may be proud of their identity and rightly so, but the majority of the people will understand that being part of the UK is far more beneficial than standing alone. And the last thing that our two nations want is to have another Northern Ireland, which would be a very real possibility if the Union was to fall into dispute. Anyway, it's not like they are some downtrodden inferior cousin.
The Scots already have their own parliamentary Assembly, that English people have no input into, yet Scots politicians still have a say on issues that affect England. So, in reality, it is The English that should have more of the beef.!!!

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:44 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
What is this "public order offence"?


Kinda like what we call Disorderly Conduct, or Disturbing the Peace - catch all for when they wanna arrest you for something, but got nothing real to charge you with.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 14, 2012 9:43 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Actually, PK, I agree with you. While I recognize the "slippery slope" of censoring or punishing some free speech, I, too, would like to see it slightly less black and white. But that's just me.

I see you've got another similarity to us:
Quote:

Some of Britain's most influential former military figures are under investigation after allegedly boasting about their ability to secure arms contracts for private firms in violation of British law.

The "generals for hire" scandal broke late Saturday following the publication of a Sunday Times investigation that used hidden cameras to capture the alleged claims by the men, all recently retired military officers.

The Ministry of Defense moved quickly Sunday to distance itself from the alleged actions of the retired generals, saying an investigation was under way.

"Equipment is procured in the interests of our Armed Forces and not in the interests of retired personnel. Former military officers have no influence over what (defense ministry) contracts are awarded," Philip Hammond, the defense secretary, said.

In Britain, military personnel are required to wait two years after leaving the service before taking a job where their former position may give their employer or clients an advantage.

According to the Sunday Times, its three-month investigation focused on "the revolving door between the Ministry of Defense and private arms companies."

Lt. Gen. Sir John Kiszely allegedly confided to a reporter posing as a representative of an arms firm that he could use his role as president of the Royal British Legion to push his clients' agenda with the prime minister and other senior officials.

Another retired military official, Lt. Gen. Richard Applegate -- a former defense ministry procurement chief -- was captured on video allegedly describing a secret lobbying campaign in parliament on behalf of an Israeli arms company. http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/14/world/europe/britain-generals-for-hire/i
ndex.html?hpt=hp_t2

Sad to see that over there; we're steeped in it, so I'm sad to see it happening in any other country, too.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 22, 2012 3:40 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


It seems that the Jimmy saville accusations are increasingly becoming justified, according to an expose programme this evening. Cover ups going back 40 years. I'm embarrassed I defended him in the first place.
But the question still remains, "What is the point of investigating after the death???" If you can't come forward when alive and prosecutable,you will get no closure????"

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 22, 2012 3:43 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree about investigations after death...somehow it just doesn't seem right to a degree. I'm sure it does to those harmed, tho', so I won't try to stand in their shoes. Just damned, damned sad...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 22, 2012 8:34 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Of interest to me in this thread: I hope they figure out where that little Welsh girl is and who did it. And that Scottish independence thing got my attention. I'm the type of person who is notoriously predictable, for instance the reasons I thought those stories stood out are so apparent, I'm quite transparent I'm afraid. And I see nothing wrong with that.
I like knowing what else is going on, all the stuff here gets old after a while and its fun to be informed about the rest of humanity instead of living in a little bubble.

Niki, I find it odd, and always have, how surprised you are that there is crap anywhere one goes. You always seem so surprised by that concept, why? People are people and I know you know that, so I'm perplexed by the idea that the less desirable side of humans in any way surprises you.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:54 AM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Oh, Peace and KPO, and anyone else in the know, I was wondering about something I saw on TV the other day. On Secret Princes, a reality show I watch, they were showing lord so-and-so on his estate shooting at targets and having a jolly time. If the Everyman in Great Britain can't own firearms why can lord so-and-so? Maybe you can own guns if you go through lots of paperwork etc.? I'm confused.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 6:03 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Farmers can own guns, but the types they can own are restricted - no semi-automatics for e.g.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:10 PM

PEACEKEEPER

Keeping order in every verse


Private citizens cannot own guns unless they are members of a licensed shooting club or their business requires the use of firearms.So farmers can own a gun for dispatch of their livestock. They cannot carry the weapon in a public place, unless it is being transported for repair or replacement, or for purpose of competiton. The license for any firearm is extremely difficult to obtain, and is bound by stringent references and checks. Even when being transported, the weapon must be made unfirable and boxed and secured.It cannot be carried in one piece or without packaging.


Of course, we have weapons that are illegally obtained and we have some gun crime, but generally speaking it's pretty minimal.

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:05 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Okay, that helps, lord so-and-so has a farm so I guess he's allowed. In Ireland too you can have certain kinds of guns in certain situations, I think they are a little less restrictive over there than in GB (note that I'm speaking of the Republic, not NI, I'd imagine NI has the same rules as the rest of GB. Am I right that they are a little less particular in ROI?

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 26, 2012 5:01 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by peacekeeper:
It seems that the Jimmy saville accusations are increasingly becoming justified, according to an expose programme this evening. Cover ups going back 40 years. I'm embarrassed I defended him in the first place.
But the question still remains, "What is the point of investigating after the death???" If you can't come forward when alive and prosecutable,you will get no closure????"

With the grace of age, commander, we learn to accept.



It's really interesting, isn't it? But I think it says a lot about the power that this man held while he was alive that meant he was untouchable and could abuse with impunity, which he apparently did his whole life.

0\
Quote:

HE WAS the biggest television star in Britain, courted by prime ministers, princes and the Pope. And now the millions of people who had watched, laughed at and grew up with the late Jimmy Savile, OBE, KCSG, are trying to come to terms with the fact that he had been sexually abusing under-age girls for 50 years. It was shocking, people agreed, and yet somehow not surprising: when you watch old TV clips of him fondling star-struck children, it all seems so obvious - and shameful: why hadn't they realised?

More to the point, why did the BBC fail to investigate the rumours that we now know were rife in the '60s and '70s: that their golden goose, kingpin of top-rating shows Top of the Pops and Jim'll Fix it, was entertaining young girls from studio audiences in his dressing room and at post-show parties, delivered to him by program assistants. Or that when he was out on the road running for charity he took young fans to bed in his campervan.

And after Savile's death last year, why was an investigation into his predatory activities by the BBC's flagship current affairs show, Newsnight, suddenly dropped - to be followed a month later by two fulsome tribute programs?

And why did the BBC file away incendiary evidence gathered by Newsnight producer Meirion Jones and reporter Liz MacKearn, only to see the same material used by its arch competitor, ITV, in a report screened a year later, which delivered compelling testimonies from more of Savile's alleged victims.
Advertisement

These questions preoccupied Britain last week in the wake of a BBC Panorama report - ''What the BBC Knew'' - watched on Monday night by 5 million people. Amid a cascade of theories about conspiracy and cover-up, the BBC's director general, George Entwhistle, and BBC Trust chairman Lord Chris Patten were summoned for questioning by the British government's culture, media and sport committee.

Why did Entwhistle, director of vision for BBC One at the time of the Newsnight investigation, not ask what was in it? He did not want to show ''undue interest''.

Why was a blog by Newsnight editor Peter Rippon, explaining his reasons for abandoning the investigation, endorsed by the BBC and then three weeks later criticised for ''inaccuracies''. Entwhistle was ''disappointed'' by the inaccuracies, he told the committee, and had asked Rippon to ''step aside'' pending an inquiry.

It is a process all too reminiscent of the same committee's hearings earlier this year into phone hacking at News International. And as with the News scandal, the stain is spreading through the ranks of executives who ''weren't aware'', reaching across the Atlantic to former director general Mark Thompson in New York, about to take up a post as CEO of The New York Times - an appointment that now looks in jeopardy.

David Attenborough and acclaimed foreign correspondent John Simpson, both leviathans of broadcasting, have pronounced it the worst crisis to hit the BBC for 50 years.

But Steve Hewlett, a former Newsnight editor, now a columnist and presenter of The Media Show on BBC Radio, disagrees: ''If it could be proved that BBC management quashed the Newsnight program for corporate reasons, that would be very serious,'' he says, ''but there is no evidence they did. Their crime has been not a cover-up but the spectacularly incompetent way they have handled the fallout.''

Hewlett thinks the program was probably pulled for genuine editorial reasons: ''Hindsight is a dangerous thing: we know now that there are probably hundreds of women out there who were abused by Savile, but did it look like that to Peter Rippon a year ago? His team had just one woman on camera and other witnesses they'd never actually met. If you were an editor you might say, 'That's not quite enough'.''

The real question for Rippon and the BBC, says Hewlett, is why, having pulled the program, they just sat on it. ''That is the truly extraordinary thing.''

But while British journalists have been obsessed with the Newsnight affair, the public is more interested and appalled by the revelations contained in the two television exposes. The allegations are bad enough: that Savile not only cherry-picked young fans for sexual favours, but targeted the most vulnerable - in hospitals, at Broadmoor secure psychiatric institution and at Duncroft, an approved school for emotionally disturbed girls.

As a celebrity volunteer and fund-raiser he was often given his own flat or dressing room where he took his victims. ''The younger the better,'' was Savile's motto, according to his biographer Dan Davies. But Savile was not particularly secretive about his activities - staff at those institutions now seem, at some level anyway, to have known what he was up to. So why did nobody do anything?

One by one, Savile's former BBC colleagues and producers were hauled out of retirement as Panorama presenter Shelley Joffre asked that question.

As a young reporter, Martin Young joined Savile on a charity run and found him lying on the bed in his campervan with a teenage girl. ''I thought he was a pervert,'' Young told Joffre. Did he think about reporting it? ''No, it never crossed my mind, and I take my share of blame for that.''

Reporter Bob Langley saw girls - ''12, 13, possibly 14, definitely not 15'' - leaving the campervan: ''[Savile] indicated to me in a nudge nudge sort of way he had just had sex with one of them … Should I have reported it? What would have happened? He would have said it was a joke and that would be the end of it.''

On one show Savile brought his friend Gary Glitter - later a convicted paedophile - onto the set where they both sat cuddling young girls: ''I'm giving girls away here,'' chortled Savile, ''we've got them from everywhere, we've even got some from Broadmoor.'' He was routinely filmed in clinches: ''The BBC bought into Savile's sexually suggestive style big time,'' said Joffre.

In 1973 the controller of BBC1 set up a meeting with Savile to question him about rumours that were circulating. Derek Chinnery was then head of Radio One. ''It was naive of us,'' he admitted, ''obviously the man was going to deny it; if the man has denied it, you don't go out and hound him. I know it sounds terrible …''

It does now, of course, but that was a long time ago. Stewart Purvis, former CEO of ITV, worked at the BBC in the '70s: ''We weren't all as concerned about codes and best practice in those days,'' he says, ''In fact, I remember being sexually harassed by the head of BBC News.''

Karin Ward was 14 when Jimmy Savile singled her out at Duncroft, offering her ''cigarettes for sex'' or a trip to a TV centre if she would give him oral sex. She didn't tell anyone because, as Dan Davies told Panorama: ''Who is going to take the word of a girl from an approved school?''

Those girls are adults now and, thanks to investigations - albeit belated - by police and media, they are now telling the secrets that have haunted them for up to 50 years.

Alicia Alinia, a solicitor with Slater & Gordon, said the firm had more than 30 potential clients in the case. ''Today the email box is full again. A lady told me on the phone last night, 'I've buried this for 40 years, now it's clear to me I was not the only one','' she said.

''Money is not the aim. What they want is recognition, truth and accountability.''

Three inquiries have been announced - two by the BBC and one into why an earlier investigation into Savile by Surrey police in 2007 was not followed up by the criminal prosecution service. By Thursday this week a criminal investigation by Scotland Yard and other forces had 300 potential cases on file. ''There is no doubt Savile was one of the worst paedophiles in criminal history,'' said Commander Peter Spindler, head of the investigation. Arrests of other abusers linked to Savile are expected imminently, some of them apparently household names.

What does this mean for the BBC? Commentators agree that the fuss over the canned Newsnight report will blow over but that an investigation into the culture of the light entertainment department will prove ''really damaging''.

Simon Jenkins wrote in The Guardian: ''The corporation's survival depends on its self-abasement. Anything less than total disclosure would be inexcusable.''

It may not be enough. On BBC Radio's Law in Action, retiring appeal court judge Sir Stanley Burnton was asked what the BBC should do - set aside large sums of money, or prepare to defend themselves? ''They should be talking to their solicitors,'' he said.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/the-monster-in-the-bbcs-midst-20121026-
28ayi.html#ixzz2ASqnSVTk


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 29, 2012 1:32 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


That's really horrible, the thing that is most horrible about it is that people helped him be able to do it, they brought young girls to him, and he used ones who wouldn't be believed because they had things going on already so the adults looking after them might not trust what they said. that's really awful.

And while we're on the subject of under aged things, in GB the age of concent is too young in my opinion. 16 is too young to be rutting with 30 year olds and have no one care. I think 18, 19, 20 is grown, not 16. I mean, if the age of concent were only two years lower than that, then some of these girls who were with this guy wouldn't be considered being used wrong, people would see it as concentual and that's just not okay, no matter where you're from.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:56 - 2076 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:20 - 6156 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:18 - 57 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Fri, March 29, 2024 02:54 - 3414 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Fri, March 29, 2024 02:49 - 11 posts
Long List of Celebrities that are Still Here
Fri, March 29, 2024 00:00 - 1 posts
China
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:10 - 447 posts
Biden
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:03 - 853 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL