Syldon

Douglas Ross abstained when it came to voting for a suspension for Owen Paterson who was caught making money with lobbying. It seems he is more party than standards.

As for Matheson, the devil is in the detail in what he knew about the charge before he sent it to an expenses charge.

How did the son get access to a government device?

Did he know the amount of the roaming charge when he sent the bill to his expenses account?

If he gave access to someone for a device that holds GDPR sensitive information or he realised how much he had been charged, then he has no option to resign. I could easily see his son sneaking his password or him handing the bill in without looking at it.

Please do not go down the line that I have just experienced from worldnews@lemmy.ml

Someone asked the question regarding a slur "the river to the sea" that is being bandied about by some. They could not understand why it is considered antisemitic. I gave an explanation and a link to a newspaper article. This got me a 2 month ban for being antisemitic.

My post questioning this here.

Just show some common sense when instigating bans. At the very least respond when someone questions a ban. And finally be prepared to accept a mistake has been made.

So that people remember they are morons when it comes to a general election. Complacency will allow these thieving scumbags to come straight back into office.

They have changed the picture from white fivers mate.

The slogan can be construed that way as I said in my post. It actually has many variations as I am led to believe.

I was giving an answer to a question that some one asked how the slogan was antisemitic. I was not using the slogan myself. In fact in hindsight I don't think I even used the slogan even in the description. The article I linked had it embedded in its title. The article referred to the slogan as a slur and explained why an MP was evicted from the Labour party in the UK.

In response to your PM

@OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml

Lmao no.

Also are you Jewish? Because I had family who literally survived a nazi death camp and I’m telling you, youre being antisemitic as shit. Maybe listen.

Again I did not use the slogan. I gave an explanation to its reference and why it is considered an insult by some.

Since you ask, I am not Jewish or any other religion. I was baptised RC, but now find all religion superstitious nonsense. However, if you want to place all your faith in that superstitious nonsense, then have it. I simply do not care enough to dissuade anyone from it. I do recognise the dangers of religion though. As can be viewed by the actions of Hamas and the IDF in current events.

And that war where your family survived, well my father helped in that. My father took part in the D-day landings and then on into Germany. We still hold the medals in the family to prove it.

Sunak is listening to them. This is why Hunt is proposing to give tax cuts to the well off in the next budget. We seriously could be looking at yet another UK meltdown before we can remove this lot.

I am actually all for this being offered on the NHS as a voluntary option. Obviously making it a condition of benefits is just batshit crazy. It is sadly what we expect from the Tories these days. However for those with real issues and a desire to solve them then maybe this can help. There are side effects to using the drugs. People should always understand the risks. You never something for nothing in this life.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/ozempic-wegovy-side-effects-safe-b2424617.html

They found those using weight loss jabs were 9.09 times more likely to suffer inflammation of the pancreas, which can, in some cases require surgery

They were also 4.22 times more likely to develop a bowel obstruction and were at a 3.67 higher risk of gastroparesis, or “stomach paralysis”, which limits the passage of food from the stomach to the small intestine.

First author Mohit Sodhi, a graduate of UBC’s experimental medicine programme and fourth year UBC medical student, said: “Given the wide use of these drugs, these adverse events, although rare, must be considered by patients thinking about using them for weight loss.

“People who are otherwise healthy may be less willing to accept these potentially serious adverse events.”

It is nothing more than a threat to the factions within the Tory party. Even if the Lords accepted this new legal statement/law or whatever it is, it does not change the how the judges deemed Rwanda. There was nothing that said because the UK said Rwanda is not safe. It was stating Rwanda is fundamentally not a safe place to send refugees who are waiting to be processed. Having the UK parliament declare something other than it is will not change that fact.

He is basically giving them (the Tory crazy bunch) a head's up. Look I will look like I am dealing with this. You can use this to appease your batshit crazy supporters. The alternative is an election.

It is a turn up for the books when Starmer pulls out the Corbyn card to get out of a crisis.

Not really antisemitic though is it?

Kind of annoyed right now, but I appreciate reality check and will delete that part.

It is used two different ways. One is the call to murder Jews, the other is a solo effort to be closer to god. I only know this because it is in the UK media of late. The sad part people are using on the pro-Palestinians marches knowing full well it will insight a violent reaction.

EDIT: others are throwing in different meanings in this post. It seems it has many variations. Not being Jewish or Muslim shows I do not have enough of a vested interest to understand all of the context surrounding this.