.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
Paladin
-
Posts
1,168 -
Joined
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Paladin
-
-
Yet he's still a member on here, apparently.
-
30 minutes ago, Poppy said:
Like your lattes then ?
Why should submitting some information for balancing the discussion be indicative of my drinking preference? I fail to see the logic.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Poppy said:
"Coffee farmers and their families are supposed to benefit from what are called partnership agreements between the EU and its member states’ former colonies. But every time you drink a cup of Nespresso coffeeyou are sending more money to Nespresso and Nestlé than to dirt-poor coffee farmers who rely on the crop.Typical Giarduan fodder. On a more positive note: "Farmers supported through the pilot managed to increase their coffee yield by around 100% and to double their income as seen in the below table." (source)
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:
The small amount of Tempests link that I have read so far gives me a distinct that he is attacking the right wing rather than racism, and that colour prejudice is nothing more than a convenient cause to be used at his pleasure. Just my take on it. I shall read more when time allows.
I have tried to stay out of this discussion, but I must confess I really don't understand what you are saying, MM. How can the content of the link be attributed to Tempest? If you look around the Topple the Racists site you'll find that it is closely associated with the Stop Trump organisation - look at the list of signatories to the letter they wrote - hard-left, Corbynists and Marxists, in the most part. Remind me of the Left's record on racism under Mr Corbyn.
Before the mods jump in, I'm not trying to politicise the discussion, just trying to point out that there are many 'protesters' who are motivated more by their hard-left politics than by any sense of injustice to minority groups.
-
3
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, Tempest said:
If anyone wants to check whether a statue, person or monument near them is being targeted by the movement to be torn down, they have kindly provided an interactive map
https://www.toppletheracists.org/
41 minutes ago, Paul said:That's very useful Tempest, thank you. I have added the statue of Ramjet, in Much Whinging In The Marsh for his tyrannical abuse of and discrimination against internet forum moderators.
Sorry to spoil your fun but:
"Fill in this form with the details of your item to add it to our map. Submissions will be moderated by the organisers."
Moderated or censored? You decide.
-
2
-
-
58 minutes ago, Ray said:
Good point, here are some resources available without bricks. I don't claim to have looked at them but it only took 5 minutes to find this list. Some are on platforms I don't have but there should be plenty to get a flavour of the problem.
Black Lives Matter Resources
Following the tragic news surrounding the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers, many people are asking themselves, ‘what can I do, what can I say, what action can I take?’ to eradicate systematic racism and fight for justice.
Following the tragic news surrounding the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers, many people are asking themselves, ‘what can I do, what can I say, what action can I take?’ to eradicate systematic racism and fight for justice.
Overt and covert racism isn’t just an American problem. It’s a worldwide injustice. We are all accountable for the energy and actions that cause harm to BIPOC. We must ask more of ourselves and our friends and interrogate tough truths; to lean into the discomfort and denial and seek to understand our privilege as white people and what that power and protection has afforded us.
It’s never too late to cultivate change, empathy and education. To be better and do better. If you’re wondering where to start with your learning, or how to dismantle institutional racism in your own life and immediate circles – because, yes, it exists – we’ve rounded up some insightful resources to help you begin this life-long work.
etc., etc., etc.
Copyright material should always be attributed. The original article can be found here https://zoella.co.uk/2020/06/01/black-lives-matter-resources/
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, VetChugger said:
My apologies for a bit of cherry picking Vaughan but when addressing the merits or whatever of Churchill, don't just look at WWll. This was copied from another forum because he said this better than i could!
"Winston Churchill: heroic anti-Nazi war-time leader, personification of the 'bulldog spirit' or entitled, racist aristocrat who personally oversaw the burning to death of Jewish anarchists, suggested the shooting of striking Welsh miners and was the architect of a devastating famine in which millions of Indians lost their lives? Is it possible for us to reconcile passionate national mythology with detached historical science and understand him as both?, it is only by fully understanding our past and coming to terms with it that we can reconcile and move forward. The imperial past should be confined to a museum, where it can be studied and discussed objectively, and, in the meantime, we need to find new heroes and new ideas to inspire us. Let the plinths reflect our aspirations, not our divisions. "
I'm afraid unconditional hero worship of the man really makes me very uncomfortable!
What was the source of this anti-Churchill rhetoric, please? It doesn’t take much research to see just how biased it is. He was certainly no angel and, perhaps, not a very nice person, but simply to repeat such ... words fail me ...does no-one any favours.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Poppy said:
There is evidence that undercover Police infiltrate groups over the long term, and will act as 'agent provocateurs' . This may - or may not - have been the case here. You can see why they would want to wear masks !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_undercover_policing_relationships_scandal
That article makes it clear that the enquiry found such behaviour to be totally unacceptable and the Met Police "stated the methodology had constituted abuse and a "gross violation" with severely harmful effects". The units have been disbanded. A great deal of police work is intelligence lead, with covert officers involved. That is entirely appropriate, subject to suitable restraints and supervision, which has, in some case, been absent.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, batrabill said:
Nonsense. Yours just changing the subject. Not falling for that. Start a thread about African genocidd why don’t you?
I thought this was about racism. The demonstrations in the UK were prompted by an event in the USA, so I don't think I'm changing the subject by mentioning racist behaviour in other countries, behaviour that involved the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in ethnic minorities. I'm sorry if that doesn't chime with your agenda, but it can't and shouldn't be so lightly dismissed.
-
1 hour ago, batrabill said:
This is what is known as whataboutism
That is, someone highlights something bad, people rush in to say what about....?
It’s just a distraction.
I don’t have time in my life to address problems in other parts of the world, but when I see blatant racism in my own county it is my responsibility to call it out.
"Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument." (Wiki)
Sorry, but I don't think my post fits that definition, but you did manage to avoid responding to the evidence I provided.
-
2 hours ago, rightsaidfred said:
I feel confident in stating that while there are undoubtedly racist in the white community there is far more racism amongst various non white cultures and institutionally against the domicile white population.
30 minutes ago, batrabill said:This is quite possibly the most untrue statement I have ever read.
I can’t be bothered to unpick it. If you don’t recognise quite how false it is then you really have a problem.
It is quite clear what tradition this thinking comes from.
I'd love to see you try to unpick that statement, batrabill. But before you do, you might like to read this article
and that's before we discuss the happenings in East Timor, Myanmar, Iraq ... shall I go on?
-
2
-
-
50 minutes ago, Vaughan said:
For the sake of semantics, the police remain the "instrument" of the civil power.
The Army serve the Queen, as keepers of the Queen's Peace. A traditional principle which is always worth remembering, in our democracy. This is why we are not a banana republic.
For the sake of semantics, the Police also serve the Queen. The declaration made by all police officers is contained in the Police Act:
"I....................of....................do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will, to the best of my skill and knowledge, discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law."
Note the word "impartiality". 'Taking the knee' while on duty in front of a crowd of demonstrators is hardly an expression of impartiality. Not for one moment can I imagine a member of our armed forces acting in such a manner. I'll say no more!
-
1
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, JawsOrca said:
That's the thing, the restrictions on movement is written in law: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/regulation/6/made Unless the defence is "Exercise" , although checking my boat can hardly be explained as exercise but if it's not so clearly written then why was it enforceable least week?? (Surely last week then the police was acting on guidance. (or perhaps we aren't in this emergency period now).. it's all so bizarre, I've always been led to believe that law is pretty black and white but it seems so grey at present. I wouldn't like to be a copper or a judge at the moment...
I don't think judges would have too much of a problem - they actually read and (usually) understand the law. Policemen of today, it seems, don't bother, and rely instead on what they read in the media or see on the television.
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, JawsOrca said:
This is what slightly worries me and I'm not legal expert at all... I understood the the COVID restrictions where written in law and thus the police can enforce. (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/regulation/6/made)
The kind of lifting of these "Restrictions" are just guidance are they not? The law hasn't been changed at present so surely all restrictions written in law are still in place and thus the police can still enforce??? Are we being led down a path where there is currently a law in place but the government is advising we can break it? (I hope that makes sense).
There is only ONE restriction on movement: "During the emergency period, no person may leave or be outside of the place where they are living without reasonable excuse." That is still in force.
Everything else is how that restriction can be ignored without fear of prosecution. So there has to be a "reasonable excuse" for anyone to go out. The regulations originally set out a list, which was not exhaustive, of circumstances which would be a "reasonable excuse". That list has now been expanded, by subsequent guidance from the government, as to what would be considered rasonable, in the light of subsequent developments.
The basic restriction hasn't been lifted. It's just that more "reasonable excuses" have been provided by government advice.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Poppy said:
Meanwhile...
Police in England told they do not have powers to enforce social distancing
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-05-13/no-powers-to-enforce-social-distancing-in-england-police-told/
This is what happens when you have government by Regulation, and not Legislation.
As ever, the devil in in the detail. When people are going about their business individually, there is no law that says they mustn't go within 2 metres of someone else. It just a very sensible precaution (or so we're told). However, if a number of people decide to gather in a public place, whether or not they are within 2 metres of each other, the law says:
During the emergency period, no person may participate in a gathering in a public place of more than two people except—
(a)where all the persons in the gathering are members of the same household...
Relying on sound bites is never a good idea.
BTW, what is the difference between Regulation and Legislation? Regarding Covid-19 the primary legislation is the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984, under which the regulation, The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, was made.
-
2
-
-
-
4 minutes ago, FreedomBoatingHols said:
The new document does not mention returning home and says you can travel for any distance, which obviously also means for any length of time too since teleportation isn't possible. This alone leads rise to the problem you highlight. Technically, there is NOTHING stopping anybody getting in their car with a duvet and driving to anywhere (in England) and returning days later. I could, from Tomorrow, drive to Cheshire and collect my motorhome, take a walk around Buxton and return home with it. I won't but the wording of the document does not exclude it at all.
You could always try to push the boundaries, but I'll repeat, the law is that you don't leave the place in which you are living. Everything else is guidance on what might be considered to be a reasonable excuse. There is further government guidance here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do
Take a look at paragraphs 1.7 and 1.9. If you still think there is a carte blanche to swan around England as you wish, good luck with Plod.
-
3
-
-
31 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:
Whilst my common sense tells me that if cabin cruisers are used as day boats then there will, inevitably, be those that abuse the situation, which would surely not be preferable!
But that's a different topic all together.
-
42 minutes ago, Timbo said:
I was wondering Paladin, would the regulations created in the statutory instrument of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 under section 45R of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 have not been amended? Would alteration to this statutory instrument be an indication of government thinking on the epidemic and management of population movement?
I wondered the same thing, but as the government has said it is the guidance that has changed, not the law, it doesn't appear so.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, marshman said:
As far as the BA are concerned lets see some initiative. Don't do what the BMF has done and asked permission - the answer to them was inevitable I am afraid, and it will be the same to the BA as well. Ultimately that will only make it worse for BA and perhaps it will cause them to fall on their sword brought on by their indecisions. If they don't do anything positive soon, you can kiss goodbye to next years funding and then they are further into the mire!
So what would happen if, despite government guidance that leisure boating isn't one of those activities that should resume, the BA tells us we can start using our boats again. The regulation is very clear: "During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse." It would be the boater who would have to convince a court that ignoring government advice, in favour of the advice given by an unaccountable quango, is a "reasonable excuse" for contravening that regulation.
I wouldn't like to be defending that case.
-
6
-
-
2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:
No firm guidance, yet. It does seem to me that day-boating will be acceptable, at least we can hope so. Will folk in general use their common sense in the event that that is the case?
Define day-boat.
If I take out a small open boat for the day, I will have no on-board hand-washing facilities (OK, so I can take some alcohol gel, which is less effective than soap and hot water), no toilet facilities (bucket-and-chuck-it or bin liner...nice) and public facilites are all closed.
If I take my cabin cruiser out for the day, I have on-board soap and hot water and full toilet facilities available.
My common sense tells me a cabin cruiser, used for a day, is preferable.
-
8
-
-
9 minutes ago, vanessan said:
I’ve not seen or heard this anywhere else, can anyone clarify?
Paragraphs 1.7 and 1.9 of this government document https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do
-
2
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, marshman said:
But the BA won't go it alone and will do anything it seems to stop people using or visiting the damned things- if you can go on a paddleboard, canoe on them, or fish ( which you can't yet!) why can you not use your boat? Limit use to local people by all means and I promise not to stay on it overnight but by not allowing it, is totally nonsensical!!
I knew they would get themselves into this hole but they would not listen - now look where its got them and they will continue to lose respect of even their most loyal supporters - its NOT the same as the CRT so the BA need to make their OWN minds up! I bet they chose the wrong path!!!!!!! Hire boats, sadly, need to be treated in a different class and until travel restrictions are relaxed a bit more, so do private owners living over say 100 miles away at least in the very short time ( sorry chaps!) but penalising the local private owner is wrong wrong wrong whichever way you look at it!!!!!!
PW - where do I sign up?????
Can I just say that I think the BA is doing a sterling job, JP in sole charge seems to be the way to go, and I do hope the tolls are trebled next year, so that they have much more money to
wastespend.Well, someone's got to stand up for them, now that MM has joined the ranks of the 'little people'
Welcome aboard
-
1
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Vaughan said:
...And now as to cancellation by the customer :
They say that you can only demand a refund of your balance payment for a "qualifying reason", one of which is - Compulsory quarantine of you or any member of your party or your travel being prevented by Government restriction following an epidemic.
That would seem clear enough until you consider what is a Government "restriction"? Is it a law enforcement, or a recommended guideline? And please, before some members climb back into their pulpits and shout "stay at home and save lives!" at me, we have to consider what these words might mean in a court of law. I think it is safe to assume that an insurance company would not pay out on a "guideline"!...
Just to be clear, the law on this is contained in The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 Section 6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.
Section 6 (2) then gives circumstances that may be considered to be 'reasonable excuse'. Going on holiday is not on that list.
The fundamental restriction is designed to prevent people from leaving the place where they are living, so, yes, travel is being prevented.
Staying On Boats
in Broads Chat
Posted
But the 2 metre rule hasn't been removed. What the Prime Minister actually said in his speech to the Commons today was (and I have emphasised the first and last sentences):
"Where it is possible to keep 2 metres apart people should.
But where it is not, we will advise people to keep a social distance of ‘one metre plus’, meaning they should remain one metre apart, while taking mitigations to reduce the risk of transmission.
We are today publishing guidance on how businesses can reduce the risk by taking certain steps to protect workers and customers.
These include, for instance, avoiding face-to-face seating by changing office layouts, reducing the number of people in enclosed spaces, improving ventilation, using protective screens and face coverings, closing non-essential social spaces, providing hand sanitiser and changing shift patterns so that staff work in set teams.
And of course, we already mandate face coverings on public transport.
Whilst the experts cannot give a precise assessment of how much the risk is reduced, they judge these mitigations would make “1 metre plus” broadly equivalent to the risk at 2 metres if those mitigations are fully implemented."