The Glass is Empty

NATO chief Mark Rutte takes scaremongering to a new level, saying Europe must be prepared for a war "on the scale our grandparents and great-grandparents endured."

This comes as a former Biden official admits that the Ukraine war could've been prevented had NATO membership been taken off the table.

Seizing an oil tanker is a perfect symbol of what the US is actually after in its war of aggression against Venezuela.

Impunity is an enabler of criminality. And again, I suggest that we spend some time reflecting on the radicalising effect it must have on British politicians to be so deeply and directly complicit in such monstrous, racist crimes. These people have crossed a threshold into a truly dark place.

Why the assumption that it was an error?

Wait but I thought this was a resounding victory for the racist nurse. Did the scum yookay press lie to me 🤔

Who you blaming?

Byline Times O @bylinetimes.bsky.s... • 2m "What is emerging about Nigel Farage is not a single stupid comment or heated moment. Former classmates are describing a pattern of behaviour. Not just a bully, but a racist bully of the ugliest kind, directing hatred at black and Jewish pupils as a kind of sport."

It’s not him being a teenage Nazi that’s the issue here: it’s that he’s still one now, he has been throughout and his politics are those of the racist, fascist far right. The difference between him and e.g. Griffin is that Farage knows where the line is and that he should push at it, not cross it.

I'm sorry to say they won't do this because beggar-thy-neighbour class politics trumps economic growth every time.

There’s no such thing as peaceful coexistence with these people and anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant, stupid or on their side.

Starmer urges Europe’s leaders to curb ECHR to halt rise of far right Exclusive: PM calls for members of European convention on human rights to allow tougher action to protect borders

Former human rights lawyer urges leaders to curb human rights law and pander to the far right to stop the far right, explains *exactly* why we are where we are.

Guardian main headlines

Between that truly ridiculous Hyde piece on the Greens and the Starmer and Frederiksen given space to go full reactionary, the Guardian is really outdoing itself today

And if you scroll down you even get the "Make Britain Great Again" ad

Sorry but my money goes to media that fights the far right

Freedom of the Press is irrelevant if fascist billionaires control all of our media.

There obviously is no point any longer.

Headline We must protect our borders to defend our democracies. Here’s how Keir Starmer and Mette Frederiksen This is our strong message to our friends in Europe. Unless responsible governments reflect their citizens’ concerns, populists will win Keir Starmer is the British prime minister. Mette Frederiksen is prime minister of Denmark

Who needs the far right when you have the centre left media and politics as a bulwark to do its bidding?

Spare us the "Listening to legitimate concerns".

These concerns are racist, not legitimate, and they are fueled in a top down manner (and still minoritarian)

This is on you

SPECTATOR Nigel Jones The teenage Farage story misses the point All schoolboys were once obsessed with Hitler

In short, Hitler and Himmler lived permanently rent-free in all our heads. In one of my schools a boy was caned by his housemaster after a copy of Mein Kampf was found in his locker. The teacher wielding the cane had spent the war debriefing prisoners from Rommel's Afrika Korps, so was slightly parti pris, and the fact that the guilty culprit had found Hitler's autobiography in the school library did not save him from six of the best. So even if the teenage Farage made the sort of remarks attributed to him - and he has denied doing so - he would be entirely typical of his class and generation.

The British upper class, barely even bothering to deny the allegations any more

A great example here of how it simply does not matter what happens, and how the public come to be so disastrously misinformed on more or less everything. When all our media outlets feed the public much the same shit day in, day out, then it’s no wonder Yer Da has developed Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease.

This is why I say the British press is so much more poisonous than e.g. Fox News. Fox might be wackier and more insulting, but alternatives are available. In Britain, this is everything: all channels, all day, every day of the year. Unrelenting.

There is no shitty sewer that he won’t wallow in.

He wants views and controversy otherwise he’s a nonentity.

Again, it is entirely accurate to say Zionists control the West.

Not because of some shadowy cabal controlling everything but because nearly everyone with power (most of whom aren't Jewish) full supports that genocidal ethnonationalism.

They fucking lost on the substance.

632. A wider aspect of evidence we considered concerned an attack on her position in cross examination to the effect that she was generally transphobic, which she denied both when giving evidence initially and on recall (which is addressed further below). Some of the messages she sent are indicative of views which could be described as trans-phobic. In one dated 10 January 2024 the claimant described the second respondent as “it”. In an earlier part of the same message there is reference to the second respondent having a shadow (being in our view a reference to the appearance of stubble on the face) and a “pathetic voice”. These are disparaging remarks in relation to the second respondent in our view, because of the second respondent being a trans woman. 633. In another the second respondent is described as a “weirdo”, which the claimant sought to explain as someone acting weirdly, but which we did not accept as being what she had intended by use of that word. These remarks we consider to be consistent with other evidence of her making comments the second respondent was liable to find offensive that went beyond the simple expression of a gender critical belief, but amounted to personal attacks on the second respondent.

I can't help but remember that "it" is also the word used by the man who murdered poor Brianna Ghey in a transphobic attack.

These people don't have "reasonable concerns" - they are revolting bigots.

631. The third aspect was her evidence given when recalled in relation to a message she had passed on to her group of friends which related to floods in Pakistan in the most highly offensive terms. She initially described the messages as “dark humour”. Her evidence later was that the message had been sent to provoke a reaction, in broad summary. We did not consider that latter evidence to be credible given the content of the message sent and her initial evidence about it. In our view it was an untruthful attempt to downplay what she had done, which she recognised as having included very offensive material. We consider that it was clear beyond serious argument that the author or authors of the original message considered the remarks humorous, and that the claimant had also considered them humorous which was why she had passed them on. That was supported in our view by her reference to dark humour

Oooft. Sandie Peggie shared highly offensive messages and was then "untruthful" in giving evidence to the Tribunal.

This is the 'hero' Gender Critical campaigners have chosen.

796. Thirdly, the claimant’s contention was in our view not consistent with the court’s comment that “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people (whether with or without a GRC).” 797. After that comment the court explained that a person with gender reassignment as a protected characteristic could pursue a claim of direct or indirect discrimination, or of harassment, if the circumstances so warranted. There was no qualification to it to the effect that that was not applicable in, for example, the context of a single sex space under Part 5 of the Act. If their decision had been that all trans persons must be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets for the sex they identify with because it was not the sex assigned at birth, and may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights under section 7. 798. Were the claimant’s contention to be correct that would have the effect of materially reducing the extent to which that protected characteristic could be relied on by trans persons, to their disadvantage. What was desired by the trans person when living their life may not be permitted in a large number of practical instances, and would not have been consistent with the view expressed by Lady Hale in Work and Pensions, and the line of authority in relation to human rights. Such a construction in our view would also not be consistent with the interpretation of the Equal Treatment Directive from the CJEU and its predecessor as referred to above, which remains as assimilated law, and would not be consistent with a purposive interpretation still required. The development of the law in relation to what is now the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is set out above. At the very least we would have expected these considerations to have been addressed speci…

This is a real disaster for those - pretty much the entirety of the British media - advancing a maximalist reading of the For (Some) Women Scotland decision.

(i) The Supreme Court decision 789. The question that arises from that conclusion is whether the application of the Supreme Court decision must mean that, under the provisions over which this Tribunal has jurisdiction under the 2010 Act as to work, the second respondent as a biological male required to be excluded from the female changing room, such that the permission given by the first respondent to do so was necessarily unlawful under those provisions. We have concluded that the answer is in the negative.

This is the key paragraph in the Sandie Peggie decision.

There were some rather unusual questions asked in cross examination, for example Ms Cunningham asked a question seeking to compare the second respondent to the torturer in the novel 1984, to which objection was taken and after the lunch adjournment but before a decision on that was made it was withdrawn. It ought not to have been asked, but does indicate the extent to which the second respondent’s position was challenged in cross examination.

Some robust criticism is made of the way in which Naomi Cunningham conducted herself. Query whether this is going to come before her professional regulator.

B M Kelly v Leonardo UK Ltd: 8001497/2024 Employment Tribunal decision.

This is the second decision - both first instance - since the appalling For (Some) Women Scotland decision to find that there is no trans bathroom ban. www.gov.uk/employment-t...

Decision in the Sandie Peggie case.

She was not directly or indirectly discriminated against, her claim of victimisation fails entirely, her claim of harassment fails largely and her claim against Beth Upton fails entirely. www.judiciary.uk/judgments/sa...

Keir Starmer - "I’ve always wanted a Labour government but I’ve never worried about the future of our country under a Tory government."

The words of a man so insulated from the harm done by the Tories he felt no compulsion not to continue the harm not being done to him and his.