Pesky Splinter posted:

nopantsjack posted:

Prince Andrew is head of the English freemasons too isn't he? Please don't tell me the pedo rings were all involving some secret society that would be extremely cliche.

Oberleutnant posted:

I'd say a jaffa cake, personally

Oberleutnant posted:

that's what people say about the queen you bourgie sympathiser.

TinTower posted:

Because the Tories were adamant "no, it's a British road, it's totally British, etc".

tentish klown posted:

Have we reached peak Ched Evans yet?

serious gaylord posted:

Oldham's sponsors threatening to leave over this are a bit rich considering they employed Lee Hughes after he got out.

Jedit posted:

They are. And yet some people find each of them detestable, which is my point. What you were saying is that racists should be allowed to refuse employment to foreigners and blacks and that homophobic people should be able to refuse employment to gays, because they find such people detestable. But that is not enough, and it's not enough for Evans either. If Evans is to be refused employment because of his crimes, there must be a reason beyond thinking he's a poo poo. (Which there is - he's a public face of the club and sponsors and this causes a risk of financial loss for both parties.)

stickyfngrdboy posted:

The only people keeping his name in the news are the ones signing petitions to stop any potentially interested club signing him. None of this happened when Lee Hughes was released.

stickyfngrdboy posted:

I don't remember there being this amount of furore for that lad when he was released, but maybe I wasn't paying attention.

TinTower posted:

Let me, as a man, tell you about this crime that disproportionately affects women.

tentish klown posted:

c) the jury decided that she was too drunk to consent.

serious gaylord posted:

Do you have anything to contribute or are you just going to shitpost?

stickyfngrdboy posted:

I disagree with this completely. The reason the first guy got off was because she willingly got into a taxi with him and willingly went to his room with him, implying consent. Evans turned up later and she has no memory of it so consent can't be implied. I agree with the verdicts, is what I'm saying, even though I disagree with the thread majority on his future employment prospects.

Pesky Splinter posted:

History's Greatest Monster, Stephen Fry is to marry.

notaspy posted:

He may be a neo liberal shithead but he is our neo liberal shithead.

Total Meatlove posted:

I can't work out whether you think people should or shouldn't be defending the right of Charlie Hebdo writers to publish what they did.

Total Meatlove posted:

Their ability to publish inflammatory shite was the result of them existing in a free society and something that should be celebrated though.

Gonzo McFee posted:

Man one minute they were for innocent people getting shot in the face now they're against it. Which is it, Charlie Hebdo?

Total Meatlove posted:

You can call them colossal shits, but acting as if it's some delicious irony that this has happened is loving horrific.

notaspy posted:

There freedom of speech does not give you freedom from criticism, that is true, but it also doesn't mean you get to be shot by those you piss off

Pissflaps posted:

It looks like those cartoonists got what they deserved.

mfcrocker posted:

this is clearly not reason enough to shoot them.

notaspy posted:

Are we violently agreeing?

Pissflaps posted:

I know, I know, as you said: they're both wrong. The people who drew the pictures and the gunmen who murdered a dozen people for drawing the pictures. All are guilty to some degree.

mfcrocker posted:

Charlie Hebdo are wrong and the gunmen are wrong (to fairly different degrees, mind). This shouldn't be hard to understand.

Fluo posted:

It's like any political or religious extreme. Where the view is they are 100% right so it becomes easier to paint everyone else as the enemy and they go down the rabbit hole of well they're monsters so it's ok for me to kill them. If you talk to some crazy Zionist Jew, Jews for Jesus, Khawarij, Tea Party Born-Again Christian and such. You're not going to have a moderate Church of England bishop thinking he is right 100% of the time and everyone else is the enemy.

Jedit posted:

So the Oldham Athletic board received death threats and one staff member was told that a relative of theirs would be raped if Ched Evans was signed by the club. Oldham caved. I think they should have signed him on principle.

TinTower posted:

You're pretty much right. The Tories don't want either humanist marriage or mixed-sex civil partnerships because Lynton says so. The Scottish government has the right to implement them through secondary legislation, but they're still working on it.

There's been no traction on people from other jurisdictions converting their civil partnerships to marriage, either, to the chagrin of some Northern Irish couples.

Pissflaps posted:

Why can't you have a humanist wedding in England?

Pissflaps posted:

There's lots of paperwork to do anyway when getting married however you do it so it doesn't seem like that big a deal, certainly doesn't warrant all your foul language.

Oberleutnant posted:

Special Brew getting % cut. Another piece of my childhood destroyed.

How do I become a "Senior drinks analyst"?

Phoon posted:

How will restricting migrant benefits create jobs how

hookerbot 5000 posted:

But isn't surplus labour important to capitalism as it allows employers to keep wages low and stuff? And it must be in the best interest of the capitalist overlords that the surplus population, while obviously not enjoying being unemployed too much so they are keen to get ahead and strive, aren't actually all starving and dead when they are needed.

Saki posted:

I'm looking forward to the debates as an excuse to drink a bottle of wine and yell at my TV.

Gilganixon posted:

same, I am actively looking forward to the debates passing by while I do literally anything other than watch them.

Oberleutnant posted:

There should be a UKMT drinking game for the debates. The rule is you take a swig of whatever you're drinking every time a participant says something reprehensible or demonstrably false.

awesome-express posted:

For poo poo n' giggles, let's just get Ukraine in with no pre-accession infrastructure and government reform. Dirt cheap labor and hot women are a nice bonus. Take that, Putin

Zephro posted:

I don't agree with their objections but I hope they succeed anyway. Hinkley Point is a criminal waste, channelling vast quantities of money to EDF for decades. If the only way to get nuclear power is to guarantee companies return on equity of 20%+ for a third of a century then we should spend the money on renewables instead. At least they have a track record of getting cheaper, not more expensive, with time.

Zephro posted:

No, we really don't. There's no reason EDF have to run the plant apart from "markets are better", and the entire creaking, under-invested, asset-sweating UK energy industry is a refutation of that idea right now. If the markets require £20+ profit for every £100 of revenue they make, I think that's a bad deal. There's no reason the government couldn't run the plant itself once EDF have built it. Given that the government have promised that you will guarantee to pay EDF at least twice the present going rate for electricity for thirty years, it's hard to see how it could end up more expensive.

Rolled Cabbage posted:

I think you should say it as you see it... we should start calling people with odious or asinine ideas Farages or possibly Gervaises.

Guavanaut posted:

Now then, let's not say things that we can't take back.

hookerbot 5000 posted:

Complete aside but as car chat and the horrible expense of running them has come up, is there a reason why my car insurance quotes are more expensive this year than last? Last year was £158 for the year with 5 years no claims, this year cheapest quote is £190 with 6 years no claims (no claims, no traffic crimes, everything the same except we're another year older and have another year of no claims).

Fat Turkey posted:

Jesus H, people are complaining that sub £200 insurance premiums are too high? I've just paid out £550 up from £400 with 4 years no claims in my late 20s in an old C3, with the only accident I've been in was completely accepted 100% fault by the other party as pulling out when they should have given way. What I'd give for sub £200 (I would give less than £350).