You may have been following the events at the Stradey Park Hotel in Llanelli, where the Home Office planned to install 350 migrants—sacking 95 hotel employees in the process. There has been a well-coordinated demonstration against this, which appears to have resulted in a failure by police to disperse the protestors. Video footage on social media shows police leaving the scene and the Police and Crime Commissioner has been forced to write to the Home Secretary, twice. Outcomes of this sort are very much achievable by the sustained action of a number of people. Video to follow.
Letter from PCC to Home Secretary.
👇🏼
https://www.dyfedpowys-pcc.org.uk/en/news/press-releases/dyfed-powys-police-and-crime-commissioner-dafydd-llywelyn-calling-for-pause-and-review-of-plans-by-home-office-to-accommodate-asylum-seekers-at-llanelli-hotel-amid-escalating-local-tensions/
Letter from PCC to Home Secretary.
👇🏼
https://www.dyfedpowys-pcc.org.uk/en/news/press-releases/dyfed-powys-police-and-crime-commissioner-dafydd-llywelyn-calling-for-pause-and-review-of-plans-by-home-office-to-accommodate-asylum-seekers-at-llanelli-hotel-amid-escalating-local-tensions/
👏6❤1
Forwarded from Tommy Robinson News
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Locals staging protests at Stradey Park Hotel in Llanelli where the owners have sacked 95 employees to make way for some 350 unvetted migrants, the Welsh are having none of it!
❤28👏7👍6
Charles Malet × Unbound Today
The obfuscation and conjecture surrounding the 'BBC presenter' story acts as a smokescreen covering the extremely suspect relationship between the BBC and the Met Police, as well as the perfectly astonishing efforts taken by the BBC to suppress the story in…
As the BBC continues to roll around in the oomska that will forever be its favourite subject—its own glorified failings—it looks more certain that the public will be allowed nowhere near the truth of the Huw Edwards debacle. At the moment, it seems to have boiled itself down to just two 'facts'; that Edwards has had serious 'mental health' problems for several years and that the Metropolitan Police Service have found no evidence of criminal offences having taken place.
The choreography of the story itself has led many to believe that the entire thing is nothing more than a 'psyop' to strengthen the case for the Online Safety Bill. Whilst I do not believe that to be the case, there is no doubt that many aspects of the bungling could be cherry-picked for the benefit of the Bill. Most especially, the pressure on independent news outlets, with so much focus on 'recognised news publishers' and the sanctions that may be faced by those that are not recognised.
Then there are the factors of 'content that is harmful to children' and 'identity verification', both of which can be readily connected to the use of a 'dating app', as it is impossible to verify the identity of a user and, obviously, could lead to all manner of harmful situations. The Bill contains many references to 'communications offences', despite there being a great deal of existing legislation covering this in broad enough terms to act as a catch-all.
What the Bill does do, is clad OFCOM in many layers of armour, and give it a few broadswords to boot. It is very long and tediously set out, but the Bill in full is to be found below (click on 'Get File').
👇🏼
https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137
On the issue of investigating, I would argue that the BBC should have referred this matter to police in the first instance. At best, it appears naive that they would consider that no criminal activity had taken place, and the point remains that they have neither the authority nor the tools to determine what may or may not have happened. Quite apart from determining whether there was any credence in the specific allegations against Edwards, the BBC had no way of knowing if any of the parties had been involved in any previous criminal activity.
Situations involving reporting by third parties are always complicated, often because there are a host of reasons why the apparent 'victim' may not want to take the matter further and will go to great lengths to avoid it. Had this been handled by police from the start, they would (or should) have known whether any of these characters had 'form' for reporting such matters, with or without smoke/fire. Also, and it might sound dramatic, but if Vicky Flind's statement about her husband is true, police may well have determined that he was 'in immediate need of care or control' and removed him 'to a place of safety', under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.
👇🏼
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/20/section/136
Making false allegations is, of course, a very serious business. If Edwards had a relationship with the 'victim', then this would classify the situation as domestic, which adds another layer of complexity. For more on false allegations and domestic abuse, see the CPS website:
👇🏼
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/perverting-course-justice-and-wasting-police-time-cases-involving-allegedly-false
Though presentation of events has changed, I stand by my comments of 10 Jul, especially since not nearly enough time has passed for the Met to have got to the bottom of it (so to speak).
The choreography of the story itself has led many to believe that the entire thing is nothing more than a 'psyop' to strengthen the case for the Online Safety Bill. Whilst I do not believe that to be the case, there is no doubt that many aspects of the bungling could be cherry-picked for the benefit of the Bill. Most especially, the pressure on independent news outlets, with so much focus on 'recognised news publishers' and the sanctions that may be faced by those that are not recognised.
Then there are the factors of 'content that is harmful to children' and 'identity verification', both of which can be readily connected to the use of a 'dating app', as it is impossible to verify the identity of a user and, obviously, could lead to all manner of harmful situations. The Bill contains many references to 'communications offences', despite there being a great deal of existing legislation covering this in broad enough terms to act as a catch-all.
What the Bill does do, is clad OFCOM in many layers of armour, and give it a few broadswords to boot. It is very long and tediously set out, but the Bill in full is to be found below (click on 'Get File').
👇🏼
https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137
On the issue of investigating, I would argue that the BBC should have referred this matter to police in the first instance. At best, it appears naive that they would consider that no criminal activity had taken place, and the point remains that they have neither the authority nor the tools to determine what may or may not have happened. Quite apart from determining whether there was any credence in the specific allegations against Edwards, the BBC had no way of knowing if any of the parties had been involved in any previous criminal activity.
Situations involving reporting by third parties are always complicated, often because there are a host of reasons why the apparent 'victim' may not want to take the matter further and will go to great lengths to avoid it. Had this been handled by police from the start, they would (or should) have known whether any of these characters had 'form' for reporting such matters, with or without smoke/fire. Also, and it might sound dramatic, but if Vicky Flind's statement about her husband is true, police may well have determined that he was 'in immediate need of care or control' and removed him 'to a place of safety', under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.
👇🏼
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/20/section/136
Making false allegations is, of course, a very serious business. If Edwards had a relationship with the 'victim', then this would classify the situation as domestic, which adds another layer of complexity. For more on false allegations and domestic abuse, see the CPS website:
👇🏼
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/perverting-course-justice-and-wasting-police-time-cases-involving-allegedly-false
Though presentation of events has changed, I stand by my comments of 10 Jul, especially since not nearly enough time has passed for the Met to have got to the bottom of it (so to speak).
bills.parliament.uk
Online Safety Act 2023 - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament
Current version of Online Safety Act 2023 with latest news, sponsors, and progress through Houses
👍11
If you are in need of material with which to remind those around you that they should eliminate the mainstream media from their diet, this might do the trick.
On 13 Jun 23, the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee heard oral evidence on 'Emerging diseases and learning from covid-19'. Among those speaking was Professor James Wood, Head of Veterinary Medicine at Cambridge.
The first two slides contain the relevant part of Wood's evidence, during which he said 'Some of the tick-borne infections like Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever are highly likely to spread to the UK through ticks at some point.' With regard to this fever (CCHF), that was it.
The remaining slides are just the first few pages from an internet search of the topic.
To see Wood's evidence for yourself, see the link below.
👇🏼
https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/13271/html/
For a different perspective on 'tick-borne illnesses', see video from Dr Sam Bailey.
👇🏼
https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/The-Lyme-Disease-Lie:d
On 13 Jun 23, the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee heard oral evidence on 'Emerging diseases and learning from covid-19'. Among those speaking was Professor James Wood, Head of Veterinary Medicine at Cambridge.
The first two slides contain the relevant part of Wood's evidence, during which he said 'Some of the tick-borne infections like Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever are highly likely to spread to the UK through ticks at some point.' With regard to this fever (CCHF), that was it.
The remaining slides are just the first few pages from an internet search of the topic.
To see Wood's evidence for yourself, see the link below.
👇🏼
https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/13271/html/
For a different perspective on 'tick-borne illnesses', see video from Dr Sam Bailey.
👇🏼
https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/The-Lyme-Disease-Lie:d
👍7
Today's brainteaser involves the apparent stranding of 55 whales in north-west Scotland. GB News reports an investigation will be launched.
I don't know why this has happened, but I can guess at some of the things that an investigation might not decide to look at.
Firstly, Ex SEA BREEZE, a naval exercise involving NATO and Ukraine, out of the Firth of Clyde: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/glasgow-hosts-large-nato-ukraine-joint-naval-exercise/
The concerns of the Hebridean and Dolphin Trust, about exactly this exercise in previous years: https://hwdt.org/news/2021/9/22/europes-largest-military-exercise-underway
The findings of the Natural Resources Defense Council on the effects of naval activities on cetaceans: https://www.nrdc.org/bio/michael-jasny/us-navy-implicated-new-mass-stranding-whales
What do you think?
I don't know why this has happened, but I can guess at some of the things that an investigation might not decide to look at.
Firstly, Ex SEA BREEZE, a naval exercise involving NATO and Ukraine, out of the Firth of Clyde: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/glasgow-hosts-large-nato-ukraine-joint-naval-exercise/
The concerns of the Hebridean and Dolphin Trust, about exactly this exercise in previous years: https://hwdt.org/news/2021/9/22/europes-largest-military-exercise-underway
The findings of the Natural Resources Defense Council on the effects of naval activities on cetaceans: https://www.nrdc.org/bio/michael-jasny/us-navy-implicated-new-mass-stranding-whales
What do you think?
😢12🤔7🤬6👍3
There will be something of a drought on this channel over the next week as I will be 'on leave'. However, please keep posting into the chat as it is fascinating, insightful and inspiring and we all learn from each other all the time. Charles
👍29🥰4
Last week, I spoke to a Parish Council meeting about the unthinking push towards 'decarbonising' transport and the sums which can never add up to 'net zero'. The only other view aired involved the belief that 27 million Bangladeshis will be under water if we do nothing.
With the BBC and the rest of the gang pumping this stuff out round the clock, it is easy to see how so many would believe it that to be true.
In this particular case, I would encourage you to read the article itself. Mostly, because I think it will make you laugh and, partly, as a reminder that they really are making this up as they go along.
👇🏼
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66289494
With the BBC and the rest of the gang pumping this stuff out round the clock, it is easy to see how so many would believe it that to be true.
In this particular case, I would encourage you to read the article itself. Mostly, because I think it will make you laugh and, partly, as a reminder that they really are making this up as they go along.
👇🏼
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66289494
👍12
Forwarded from Eastern Approaches—Alex Thomson
And, to accompany the above post on home education, also from Alex's channel:
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa2jiqXopITDq-29_0txkOZPZ6kDvrZnU
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa2jiqXopITDq-29_0txkOZPZ6kDvrZnU