Are you saying that you don’t stir your poo around the bowl before you flush it?!At the risk of sounding incredibly stupid, what's a "poo spoon"?
Are you saying that you don’t stir your poo around the bowl before you flush it?!At the risk of sounding incredibly stupid, what's a "poo spoon"?
I like America and Americans.
But this politically correct culture as really sunk.
At least over here we all live close enough to be within arms reach of each other. It's amazing how reasonable people with extreme views become when we get face to face.
But in the US they all live miles away from one another. They live in real life echo chambers.
I'll be glad when the spotlight comes back on the UK and Europe, like it was pre-2001.
I'm not German, so no (I hear that's something they might do in those films I've never watched).Are you saying that you don’t stir your poo around the bowl before you flush it?!
At the risk of sounding incredibly stupid, what's a "poo spoon"?
Are you saying that you don’t stir your poo around the bowl before you flush it?!
These situations aren’t comparable.You can’t have it both ways. If you think bakers should be allowed to refuse making cakes for gay people, then airlines should be able to arbitrarily choose who can fly with them and social media platforms get to say who can post.
Politically correct culture? Banning someone from flying because they cause trouble and are a mental conspiracy nutter/possible terrorist? Give the **** over.
It's astounding that after years of the "left" (including at times the saner members of the Republican party) complaining about this happening to all sorts of people (including IIRC ambassadors and ex leaders of allied countries under the great Trump), it's suddenly worthy of MMJ's attention.
IIRC the "no fly list" (as implemented under the notoriously socialist, nay communist George W Bush, Donald "the red" Rumsfeld and Condoleezza "The Communist Queen" Rice) was very specifically set up so that you could stop terrorists, or anyone the US thinks is involved in terrorism or meets certain criteria, some of which are very lax (sharing the same name...) from flying, by the sounds of it the person MMJ is referring to would very much fall under a potential terror threat if they were directly involved in the violent storming of the US capitol building in which multiple people died, and one was shot whilst attempting to gain access to a barricaded area after being warned no to by armed officers...
What it has never needed is any sort of conviction, as when those horrible people at the ACLU amongst others tried to argue that it might be a bit too much and that it could infringe on the rights of unconvicted people, going against the constitution, but those utterly notoriously activist lefty justices on the Supreme Court ruled that you didn't need a conviction to be considered too high a risk to be allowed on a commercial airline and that there were other means of travel so it didn't infringe on the civil liberties of those on the list.
i know it wasn't me you quoted and asked but i'm perfectly ok with it as long as the reasons for it are sound. which appears to be the case in this instance.So you think it's ok if someone with no criminal history is added to the no fly list?
24 hours later and no further input from the OP - What a shock!
You can't?What about all those people added to these no fly lists by mistake, or happen to have the same name as a terrorist and so are banned from flying too? Those people spend years trying to get off the no fly lists and most don't succeed because everyone waved the legislation through after 9/11 without a proper process of adding and removing people.
I can't tell from your post if you support George W Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice, or the ACLU arguing for civil liberties?
You can't?
Lets put it this way, I've been commenting on how the no fly list is badly thought out practically since it started because of the mistakes, however in this instance it doesn't appear to be a mistake if the guy was involved in the attack on the capitol building he's falling well within the intended scope of the law, to stop people who are a threat from getting on commercial aircraft.
I guess I wasn't quite clear enough in my mocking of the idea that it was a leftist cancel culture thing.
Pretty sure it wasn't written it to first constitution given its called the 1st amendment.Ahh ok.. I was probably being a bit slow.
I think one of the misconceptions that I think Americans miss is they only have free speech because it was written in to the constitution at the start. They have never had to fight for it. Whereas over here we don't technically have free speech. But we have a set of laws that give people a general guide on what we can and can't say.
Here its accepted that if someone writes or speaks a threat against someone else then its breaking the law. But I wonder if that is the case in the US, or would they get away with it being 'free speech'?
I think cancel culture is probably their first society reaction to the free for all free speech being challenged, and realising that some speech causes offence and fear.
China has blocked millions of “discredited” travellers from buying plane or train tickets as part of the country’s controversial “social credit” system aimed at improving the behaviour of citizens.
We're becoming more and more like China every day what with Boris pushing domestic passports, it's only a matter of time before non-conformists and political dissidents are systematically persecuted. Meanwhile, the sheep will still be focused on a systemic racism being pushed by corporate media that isn't backed up by any stats.
China bans 23m from buying travel tickets as part of 'social credit' system
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...om-buying-travel-tickets-social-credit-system
"improving the behaviour of citizens." AKA coerced conformity.
A social credit won't care what colour your skin is, you either do what is expected or suffer the consequences of a low social credit score.