Brexit, for once some facts.

[vfr400]

The only thing that would make sense to me was that the police used the arrest as a pretext to get him out of there because they had credible info that his life was in danger, as the event was announced in social media and he has a big target on his back The arrest was truly bizarre, there were about a dozen policemen completely surrounding him at all times until they had him in the van. If my theory is wrong, his arrest was absolutely tyrannical.

He was later released without charge, so I was right either way. The official charge was possession of an offensive weapon, not breaking covid rules as reported by some. He was surrounded by his body guards at all times, so there's no way the police could have seen any weapon even if he had one.

On balance, I'd say that the second reason that I mentioned above was the valid one. It was just a tyrannical arrest, so now they can add charged with possession of a weapon to his rap sheet to make him look bad, like they've done with other fake charges before.

 

[oyster]

Social distancing taken seriously:

 

[Woosh]

On balance, I'd say that the second reason that I mentioned above was the valid one. It was just a tyrannical arrest, so now they can add charged with possession of a weapon to his rap sheet to make him look bad, like they've done with other fake charges before.

did he have a weapon on him at the time of his arrest though?
I would have thought that with many body guards on hand, he's in safer environment than BJ! why would he need to carry a weapon (if he was carrying one).

 

[Woosh]

Bluntly, I dealt with many more serious events in my college over the years, without recourse to such commissions. Common sense seems uncommon.

that's not the point of the EHRC though.
they deal mainly with issues of principles, small victims against large institutions, offering free legal consultations on equality laws, similar to the financial ombudsman.
Would you have dealt with for example sexual harassment between a tutor and some pretty students?

 

[flecc]

So the (EHRC), with expertise in these matters, are either complicit in the false allegations or they have failed to identify the allegations as being false. Whereas you, in isolation with no resources, no access to the details of the allegations, no access to the complainant and no access to those implicated has decided the EHRC is wrong and that you are correct.

Forgive me for saying you are talking bollicks.

That conclusion certainly applies to you. The problem is that like so many people you know next to nothing about this subject so fumble your way though with guesses, supplemented by anti-socialist bigotry. I've just shown how in depth my knowledge of this subject is.

The EHRC are simply following the line of the United Nations on this, but in doing so are breaching their own article 10 on human rights. But the UN is wrong and had been ever since 1948 since United States bullying resulting from US Jewish pressure led them to grant Palestine to the Zionist terrorists, accepting the Zionist renaming of Palestine into Israel, a word meaning "land of the Hebrew god".

The UN having put themselves into that trap of doing wrong have been stuck with it ever since, leading to a long modern history of conflict which has plagued the western world ever since. Just imagine all the conflict we'd never have experienced if Israel had never been so unnecessarily created. Large numbers of Jews had been living happily there for well over 1000 years, returning long after the diaspora and recreating their synagogues and way of life, as they had in all the Arab countries.

All that was destroyed and turned into conflict and gross abuses of human rights as a result of illicit Zionist terrorist insistence on sole possession of the land.

As for your accusations against me of being anti-semitic, my past related posts on rights show that to be impossible. In various past posts I've very firmly stated that all creatures born on this planet have an absolute right to reside anywhere where it is possible, including of course Hebrews in Palestine.

I've gone much further, including being opposed to the use of borders to exclude anyone from anywhere, firmly in favour of populations being self adjusting according to availablity of life's resources and being against the ownership of land.

Those beliefs in equal rights make it impossible for me to be anti any peoples and far ahead of the politically set up EHRC in promotion of equality.
.

 

[Woosh]

I think the issue is not that JC rejects the EHRC's report but he wants to put his point of view across: only a tiny number of cases in comparison to the size of membership. That is poor, irrelevant defence. If you don't see that, then there is no point of discussing this any further. Similarly, Corbyn can't get rid of the charge by citing more severe islamophobia or racism elsewhere. The key point is, he promised to rid his party of it and failed.
Starmer wants to rid his party of this problem before the next election.
He's not going to achieve that if he lets Corbyn have his way.

 

[flecc]

I think the issue is not that JC rejects the EHRC's report but he wants to put his point of view across: only a tiny number of cases in comparison to the size of membership. That is poor, irrelevant defence. If you don't see that, then there is no point of discussing this any further. Similarly, Corbyn can't get rid of the charge by citing more severe islamophobia or racism elsewhere. The key point is, he promised to rid his party of it and failed.
Starmer wants to rid his party of this problem before the next election.
He's not going to achieve that if he lets Corbyn have his way.

Starmer can't achieve it, not even with Corbyn's full co-operation, nor could Corbyn. Anti-semitism as defined by the the Jews rhemselves has been around for at least 6000 years since the Exodus and exists to a small degree everywhere. Since the thoughts and beliefs of others cannot be controlled, there's no getting rid of it.

As I've shown, the charge against Labour is not based on any small degree of anti-semitism in the party, it is falsely based solely on Labour's refusal to accept a wholly unreasonable definition of anti-semitism, which itself is in breach of human rights.

That is what needs to be seen and understood.
.

 

[Woosh]

so you think Starmer can't beat BJ at the next election?

 

[Nev]

I was going for a walk the other day and along came a chap I know on a really nice top of the range Specialized full suspension pedelec. I asked him what size battery was in it and he told me it was 730 wh, made by Tesla.

I had no idea Tesla made e-bike batteries has anyone here heard about this? If this chap is correct about it being a Tesla battery do you think it might lead to a reduction in e-bike batteries if Tesla start to manufacture them at large scale?

 

[RossG]

And

did he have a weapon on him at the time of his arrest though?
I would have thought that with many body guards on hand, he's in safer environment than BJ! why would he need to carry a weapon (if he was carrying one).

He was carrying one alright Woosh, his mouth The Police couldn't it as it mysteriously disappeared as it always does when plod turns up. Be on the lookout for a small but stocky man in charge of a dangerous gob, he is known to turn up in large crowds.

 

[flecc]

so you think Starmer can't beat BJ at the next election?

That's a weird conclusion to reach from my post, the election will not be about anti-semitism or anyone's ability to get rid of it.

It's about the fundamental of Labour versus Conservative. That the ordinary normally unpolitical public know about. They also know Johnson and his undoubted appeal to them. They know almost nothing about Keir Starmer and he doesn't have Johnson's ability to charm the common public. He's more likely to make them switch channels with his serious political demeanour.

So it's likely to come down to the traditional Tory versus Labour issue and the old voting patterns, and as all political commentators know and I've pointed out, for Labour to win in these circumstances means winning back Scotland from the SNP.

I think that highly unlikely, leaving Starmers remaining hope as a collapse of the Tory vote due to some unexpected adverse event.
.

 

[flecc]

I was going for a walk the other day and along came a chap I know on a really nice top of the range Specialized full suspension pedelec. I asked him what size battery was in it and he told me it was 730 wh, made by Tesla.

I had no idea Tesla made e-bike batteries has anyone here heard about this? If this chap is correct about it being a Tesla battery do you think it might lead to a reduction in e-bike batteries if Tesla start to manufacture them at large scale?

They don't, this story is based on Tesla's joint development with Panasonic of 21700 cells, larger than the 18640s that they until recently and we currently use. That Specialised battery probably uses those cells made by Panasonic since 2017 which are freely available, not that it matters who makes them.

More info on this link

Including a mention of that Specialised Kenovo model.
.

 

[Woosh]

That's a weird conclusion to reach from my post, the election will not be about anti-semitism or anyone's ability to get rid of it.

it's not weird. Starmer can beat BJ. Step by step, he's proven it so far at PMQ and on Covid.

Starmer is not just more acceptable than JC, he is also more right, intelligent and effective than JC.
It's just that you can't bring yourself to accept that reality.
It's not strange that Rebecca Long Bailey and the far left wingers have left the shadow cabinet. That's a clear path to rebuilding a successful Labour party that can win power.

 

[flecc]

it's not weird. Starmer can beat BJ. Step by step, he's proven it so far at PMQ and on Covid.

Starmer is not just more acceptable than JC, he is also more right, intelligent and effective than JC.
It's just that you can't bring yourself to accept that reality.
It's not strange that Rebecca Long Bailey and the far left wingers have left the shadow cabinet. That's a clear path to rebuilding a successful Labour party that can win power.

Its the conclusion you reached as to what my post meant that was weird, nothing to do with Starmers appeal versus JC. Of course Starmer is more acceptable than Corbyn to the public and I've never posted different since that is blindingly obvious. Haven't I just posted this to you?

"I will equally agree that as a politician Jeremy Corbyn is ineffectual. "

You have an incredible ability to grasp the wrong end of the stick, I posted about the likely circumstances at the next election.
.

 

[vfr400]

did he have a weapon on him at the time of his arrest though?
I would have thought that with many body guards on hand, he's in safer environment than BJ! why would he need to carry a weapon (if he was carrying one).

Yes, if you look at the video, you can see that he was eating a crisps very aggressively. I guess in the right hands a crisp could be lethal.

 

[vfr400]

so you think Starmer can't beat BJ at the next election?

Borris won't be in the next election.

 

[jonathan.agnew]

it's not weird. Starmer can beat BJ. Step by step, he's proven it so far at PMQ and on Covid.

Starmer is not just more acceptable than JC, he is also more right, intelligent and effective than JC.
It's just that you can't bring yourself to accept that reality.
It's not strange that Rebecca Long Bailey and the far left wingers have left the shadow cabinet. That's a clear path to rebuilding a successful Labour party that can win power.

Starmer is a more appropriate, effective opponent to populist, bullshitting boris - with his legal training. In that sense I prefer him. But that is expedient. Whether starmer has more integrity than corbyn is another matter. Or whether a more enlightened electorate that supported corbyn would have taken us to a better place than a more compromising starmer will.

 

[Woosh]

You have an incredible ability to grasp the wrong end of the stick,

I just look a bit further down the line.
The anti-semitism saga was the stick the media beat Labour with. JC thinks/thought rightly or wrongly that it's a tiny problem because it does not compare with other issues.
When the election came, it's clear that JC lacked credibility because he has not sorted it.
If he could not solve a 'small problem' (according to him) then how can he be expected to solve bigger state problems?
Can you see the inconsistency of your argument?

 

[Woosh]

Whether starmer has more integrity than corbyn is another matter.

yes, I think Starmer has a lot more integrity than JC. BS would describe JC as one of those professional losers who got lucky. It's easy to pick up the megaphone and repeat all the wrongs of the capitalistic society we live in. Hello? Even communist China has thousands of billionaires.
His endorsement and later apology about a mural show exactly his character. Starmer can heal this country. JC can't. It's just as simple as that.

 

[jonathan.agnew]

yes, I think Starmer has a lot more integrity than JC. BS would describe JC as one of those professional losers who got lucky. It's easy to pick up the megaphone and repeat all the wrongs of the capitalistic society we live in. Hello? Even communist China has thousands of billionaires.
His endorsement and later apology about a mural show exactly his character.

I think that too is a parody of corbyn. Think about him and mc donnel's manifesto. I'm not sure "winners" and winning, at any cost or compromise (and we'll see how much starmer does) is integrity or a formula for a happy life