Also in the News - Part 2

[Jon the Hat]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/21/europe/italy-lesbian-couples-birth-certificates-scli-intl/index.html

 

"The northern Italian city of Padua has started removing the names of non-biological gay mothers from their children’s birth certificates under new legislation passed by the “traditional family-first” government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni...

 

"....“There is no discrimination against children,” Family Minister Eugenia Roccella told parliament when she introduced the bill in June, explaining that the children of gay couples would have access to school and medical services just like those who only have one living parent."

 

Right. And if the child and that parent both find themselves (for whatever reason) in critical condition in hospital? The other parent cannot make medical decisions for the child and if the "solo" parent dies the kid is an orphan.

 

The sooner folks driven by bigotry often inspired by books of allegory written over a millennium ago have absolutely no say in political policy decisions, the better.

What a nasty and pointless backwards step.  Righteous religious bigotry is the worst of them all.

[ozleicester]

Is it time to institute an age limit on politicians?

You cant vote until you are 18, as society assesses that you are not capable of making independent and well thought out decisions.... 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-27/mitch-mcconnell-leaves-news-conference-after-freezing/102654522



Edit - Spelling

Edited 27 July 2023 by ozleicester

[Jon the Hat]

26 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Is it time to institute an age limit on politicians?

You cant vote until you are 18, as society assesses that you are not capable of making independent and well thought out decisions.... 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-27/mitch-mcconnell-leaves-news-conference-after-freezing/102654522

Edit - Spelling

The US seems to have a problem with these old boys.  They seem much younger in the UK and Aus generally speaking.  I guess if you can retain the nomination for your seat and win, then you deserve to be there.

[Lionator]

For a man who hates snowflakes and cancel culture, Farage is being a massive snowflake by trying his best to get NatWest cancelled. 
 

(and yes it was wrong for them to give out his private information).

[Wymsey]

No surprise, here..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-66321742

[Finnegan]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

if you can retain the nomination for your seat and win, then you deserve to be there

 

This is quite a weak argument when most of these people win by virtue of the team's colours they're wearing these days and not their actual competency. 

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

This is quite a weak argument when most of these people win by virtue of the team's colours they're wearing these days and not their actual competency. 

It always comes back to our outdated local FPTP 18th century voting system that was designed where it took days to get to London from the furthest north regions of Scotland or the furthest west regions of Ireland on horseback. And so people would nominate someone once a year to travel to London to vote/give details on what was going on in their part of the country. 
 

People still try and argue our general elections are actually lots of local elections but absolutely no one treats them this way. Everyone votes for which party they want to have the most seats in the House of Commons and therefore the power to change laws.

 

Edited 27 July 2023 by Sampson

[foxile5]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/26/ufo-hearing-congress-evidence-david-grusch

 

This chap doesn't fit the profile of the usual nut job, does he? 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, foxile5 said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/26/ufo-hearing-congress-evidence-david-grusch

 

This chap doesn't fit the profile of the usual nut job, does he? 

As I said yesterday, if he's spinning a yarn here he has a fantastic career in acting ahead. He's been very convincing.

[MonkeyTennis?]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

As I said yesterday, if he's spinning a yarn here he has a fantastic career in acting ahead. He's been very convincing.

I thought the older guy, Fravor, was the most convincing. Grusch and the other one seemed pretty level-headed, but there was an element of paranoia on display, and the whole 'I'm afraid I can't tell you about that because of X,' didn't help. 

[Jon the Hat]

6 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

This is quite a weak argument when most of these people win by virtue of the team's colours they're wearing these days and not their actual competency. 

That is the first bit though, the nomination process should remove people past their sell by date.

[Jon the Hat]

8 hours ago, Wymsey said:

No surprise, here..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-66321742

70 years since the Korean armistice too.  

[leicsmac]

22 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

70 years since the Korean armistice too.  

And not really making much news over here.

 

I would submit that some folks in the western hemisphere think about North Korea more than South Koreans do.

[Bordersfox]

I was just reading about Andrew Malkinson, horrendous miscarriage of justice.  However, one thing I didn't realise was when he (or any person found to be wrongfully convicted) receives compensation they have to pay a percentage of it to essentially cover their food and board whilst they were in prison.  That could be 25% of the compo. 

 

Talk about a slap in the face from the system that already ruined your life.  

[Foxdiamond]

15 minutes ago, Bordersfox said:

I was just reading about Andrew Malkinson, horrendous miscarriage of justice.  However, one thing I didn't realise was when he (or any person found to be wrongfully convicted) receives compensation they have to pay a percentage of it to essentially cover their food and board whilst they were in prison.  That could be 25% of the compo. 

 

Talk about a slap in the face from the system that already ruined your life.  

Yes. Staggered by this.

[urban.spaceman]

17 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

It is pretty ridiculous to suggest even the most gifted hedge fund manager or indeed brilliant stock market analytics could predict the decision to exit Farage let alone the atrocious way Natwest have managed the fallout of that decision.  Do you even thing about what you are writing sometimes?  Or indeed even read the article.

This whole thing started because Farage chose to pay off his mortgage which pushed his bank account below the Coutts criteria. Coutts/Natwest handled it horrendously but it just strikes me as a staggering coincidence that Farage used his own TV show on GBNews to start a PR campaign against a bank his employer had a short position against and lo and behold, Natwest's stock tanks and Marshall's profit soar. 

[Bordersfox]

18 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

This whole thing started because Farage chose to pay off his mortgage which pushed his bank account below the Coutts criteria. Coutts/Natwest handled it horrendously but it just strikes me as a staggering coincidence that Farage used his own TV show on GBNews to start a PR campaign against a bank his employer had a short position against and lo and behold, Natwest's stock tanks and Marshall's profit soar. 

You'd have to be colossally naïve or willfully ignorant not to even entertain the idea that this was, if not done deliberately from the outset, seized upon as a way to make profit.  

 

Farage and his chums have form, on Brexit night Farage said he expected to lose the vote, even though he had access to private polling which suggested leave would win.  

 

His mates made very profitable trades as a result of his misinformation.

Edited 27 July 2023 by Bordersfox

[Daggers]

42 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

This whole thing started because Farage chose to pay off his mortgage which pushed his bank account below the Coutts criteria. Coutts/Natwest handled it horrendously but it just strikes me as a staggering coincidence that Farage used his own TV show on GBNews to start a PR campaign against a bank his employer had a short position against and lo and behold, Natwest's stock tanks and Marshall's profit soar. 

 

[FoxesDeb]

4 hours ago, Bordersfox said:

I was just reading about Andrew Malkinson, horrendous miscarriage of justice.  However, one thing I didn't realise was when he (or any person found to be wrongfully convicted) receives compensation they have to pay a percentage of it to essentially cover their food and board whilst they were in prison.  That could be 25% of the compo. 

 

Talk about a slap in the face from the system that already ruined your life.  

Yes it was the first time I'd heard about it. The state apparently deducting what would have been spent on living expenses. But the money spent on living costs, if the person hadn't been imprisoned, wouldn't have all gone to the state, so I don't really understand the reasoning behind it.

[Bordersfox]

18 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Yes it was the first time I'd heard about it. The state apparently deducting what would have been spent on living expenses. But the money spent on living costs, if the person hadn't been imprisoned, wouldn't have all gone to the state, so I don't really understand the reasoning behind it.

Exactly that. Also if you're guilty, you don't have to pay. So the state is only applying it to those who are innocent.  Absolutely no logic as far as I can tell. 

[samlcfc]

10 hours ago, MonkeyTennis? said:

I thought the older guy, Fravor, was the most convincing. Grusch and the other one seemed pretty level-headed, but there was an element of paranoia on display, and the whole 'I'm afraid I can't tell you about that because of X,' didn't help. 

I'm not down on every detail, although as I understand it, Grusch is genuinely not permitted to discuss a lot of what he's been privy to due to an ongoing complaint lodged with the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General. This relates to alleged retaliation against his investigative work whilst he was a part of a UAP Task Force. The IG found these complaints "credible and urgent" apparently. As such, Grusch has already spent at least 11 hours passing evidence to investigating parties with the relevant clearance.

 

Plenty of what he's discussing is also classified, and so is unable to be disclosed during a hearing such as that he took part in yesterday. 

 

Whether there's any truth to his claims or not, over the past year or so, he seems to have been playing a bit of chess in order to be able to even get to this point. In this respect, yesterday's hearings seem to be more about creating an environment in which Congress is able to follow-up and investigate as much as it was disseminating information to the public.

 

I've had a passing interest in the subject for 15 or so years, given the genuine sketchiness that exists amongst the overwhelming mountain of rubbish thats collected alongside it.

 

The current discussion is the latest point in a coordinated effort that's been ongoing for at least 6-7 years. Some characters involved could be seen as questionable, but plenty are so reputable that the whole situation is genuinely quite interesting. 

 

Given the current media spotlight on what has historically been a somewhat fringe topic, I'd encourage caution around listening to everything that comes from the media atm. Not in a conspiratorial way, but because it's an extremely complicated subject which a lot of these journalists have barely dipped their toes in. I've seen a fair bit of misinformation  knocking about since the hearing, which is likely just genuine mistakes given the turnaround time these professionals have been given for the story.

Edited 27 July 2023 by samlcfc

[Jon the Hat]

4 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

This whole thing started because Farage chose to pay off his mortgage which pushed his bank account below the Coutts criteria. Coutts/Natwest handled it horrendously but it just strikes me as a staggering coincidence that Farage used his own TV show on GBNews to start a PR campaign against a bank his employer had a short position against and lo and behold, Natwest's stock tanks and Marshall's profit soar. 

You clearly haven't read the Coutts internal documents.  He didn't choose to pay off his mortgage, it was coming to an end.  They took the opportunity to close his accounts because they had already decided they wanted to do so.  Their files noted they have many accounts continuing to operate where customers don't meet the criteria any more.  They also clearly say they expected him to make a fuss about it, and yet failed miserably to manage the process.

 

Also worth noting the said hedge fund had a very small position in Natwest - less than 1% of their managed funds, so I seriously doubt they would go to these lengths to make a relatively small share price movement to something they invested in months before.  Not impossible, but unlikely I think.  Did they even sell the shares?

[Suzie the Fox]

3 hours ago, Bordersfox said:

Exactly that. Also if you're guilty, you don't have to pay. So the state is only applying it to those who are innocent.  Absolutely no logic as far as I can tell. 

It makes zero sense.

[Jon the Hat]

9 hours ago, Bordersfox said:

I was just reading about Andrew Malkinson, horrendous miscarriage of justice.  However, one thing I didn't realise was when he (or any person found to be wrongfully convicted) receives compensation they have to pay a percentage of it to essentially cover their food and board whilst they were in prison.  That could be 25% of the compo. 

 

Talk about a slap in the face from the system that already ruined your life.  

a 25% deduction was made from the section of their compensation which reflected their loss of earnings while in prison.

 

They calculate how much you would have earnt while you were in prison, but of course you don't keep all your earnings, so they take of an amount for cost of living, ensuring you are put in the same position you might have been in had you not been wrongfully convicted.  This is nothing to do with the compensation element for the wrongful conviction, it is a separate part of the calculation which is literally saying how much money would you have in the bank if you had worked for this period instead of being in prison.

[Jon the Hat]

3 hours ago, Bordersfox said:

Exactly that. Also if you're guilty, you don't have to pay. So the state is only applying it to those who are innocent.  Absolutely no logic as far as I can tell. 

If you are guilty you are not being compensated for the earnings you would have made had you not been in prison.