pingpong

I'm curious as to where these no-go areas for white English people are? Sounds like bs hyperbole. Also can't agree with the sentiment that the country needs to be "cleaned" as if immigrants are dirty, racism doesn't get much more clear than that. I think the attempted legitimising of the likes of robinson is emboldening what was taboo a few months ago, which is probably a positive in terms of exposing a lot of the racism that the political right have been pretending does not exist, but hugely negative in that now a lot of nonwhite people don't feel safe in their homes. (Regardless of their immigration status)

No idea, why and what relevance would that have?

That's why I said I was wrong, although there is a lot of data that shows systemic racism and issues across the board, at least it seems like we can rely on overt racism still being taboo and it has been nice to see people standing up for diversity.

To be fair, and I may be jumping ahead again, but looks like I was wrong earlier, Bristol, Brighton, Southampton, so far, have shown that the anti racist crowd is much much bigger, peaceful, and the edl lot are only a handful of slightly sheepish gammon struggling to get themselves arrested. Hopefully stays that way through the evening.

It would be ironic if the first asylum seeker going to Rwanda was a Black British citizen fleeing the uk.

It seems to be widespread, given the number of cities suffering, so I'd say the uk as a whole, as it doesn't seem to be geographically focused anywhere that I can see? And yes, that there is a "subset" is racist - there is a difference in safety between groups of people depending on their skin colour. That's kind of the point.

So now it is here, and if you aren't white, it's not safe to go out in southampton right now because you might get physically attacked because of the colour of your skin. There's no argument anymore that the uk is not a racist country. A whole subset of my friends who happen to be british and black or brown, lived here all their lives, are now locked down and don't feel safe in their homes. There is no defence for this, no matter what your opinions on the old governments asylum policies were.

Slightly off tangent but can we put to bed the whole "ignore" thing? It doesn’t mean what you think it does. I used an old thread to identify which numbnuts are numbnuts and put all of them on ignore. That doesn't mean the posts don't show, it just means I have an extra click to open them, and it tells me not to take that person seriously. Maybe they should replace "ignore" with "flag this person as a twat".

It's not untrue. It has been established that the police will treat you more favourably if you are white, and that you are more likely to be stopped, arrested, convicted, and get longer jail time for equivalent crimes if you are black or brown. That's backed up with the data, and I agree with you, it needs to be addressed. I would give labour more than a month or two though, I don't think we can judge the impact of their actions until 3 or 4 years into their term if we want to have reliable data.

I don't want to share the exact location as it might encourage some on here to join in, but they are targeting a company near Bedford place that helps uk citizens sort out visas when they emigrate, or advising people who are here on visas how to renew etc. Nothing to do with small boats etc. But we're dealing with idiots here. I'm guessing they'll either then head past the cenotaph and into town or up bedford place and the shops there. The fact there is a match on might make it better or worse...

Southamptons turn on Wednesday evening apparently. If you aren't white British, probably should avoid the route from guildhall square up bedford place, London road and around there. What a sad state of affairs.

Insanity at the IBA press conference, over an hour delay, tech issues, the poor guy who had to go first could barely string a sentence together, the toilets are blocked, the ceo went on a rant about how the ioc chair was a "sodomite", they couldn't share any new information. Their doctor, who happens to be on their board, was abusing journalists and threatening to stop the conference, and that's before the questions started. They said they couldn't prove she was trans (which she isnt), or what was "between her legs", or what her birth was like, but that "passports can be changed". If my post is coming across like verbal diarrhea, then i have accurately portrayed the conference. High level summary The iba are calling on the old testament to bring fury upon the ioc for not protecting women. The first test in 2022 was inconclusive, and they couldn't do anything until 2023, when they tested again, but they can't say what kind of test or what the results were. Basically, it's every bit as clouded as it was before the conference, but we now know their ceo is not credible, and their doctor is an emotional basket case. Edit: it got so bad that reuters cut the feed, and the bbc walked out before the end!

Imane Khelif was disqualified from the International Boxing Association's world championships three days after she won an early-round bout with Azalia Amineva, a previously unbeaten Russian prospect. You seemed to have missed the answer to your question, in that the Istanbul test did not result in her disqualification, or prevent the iba from allowing her to compete in the worlds. (And it was only deep into the competition that they decided to disqualify her, after she had beaten amineva)

IBAs own statement states that she was tested in Istanbul 2022, after which she was not disqualified, and she was allowed to compete in the worlds in 2023, until she was disqualified "without due process", according to the ioc, who are the only ones who matter when it comes to the Olympics. worth noting she wasn't disqualified until late in the tournament, so they were fine with her in the early rounds. Worth noting the Russian iba official who got his "funny feelings" about her only got them when she defeated a Russian boxer. Worth noting the iba have since been stripped of their status by the ioc for corruption. The second test is far from evidentially strong, and she passed all of the tests before the Olympics without any concerns. She's not transgender, she's not intersex, she is a woman, who happens to have quite high testosterone levels, like most of the other women boxers do. If you watch her box, she is not that good, she is of a similar quality and strength to the other boxers. https://www.iba.sport/news/statement-made-by-the-international-boxing-association-regarding-athletes-disqualifications-in-world-boxing-championships-2023/

If anyone has any doubts about the iba impartiality on these 2 women, they've given the Italian 1st round loser gold medal prize money to make up for the fact she was beaten "unfairly". Also worth noting they also tested them a year previous to the last time, and didn't disqualify them then. It seems to be a personal vendetta on the part of kovacs.

Their previous disqualification was carried out without due process, and the iba were subsequently stripped of their status. The tests were carried out because one guy at iba "felt suspicious feelings" about them. The test was not conclusive and did not show xy or xx, and the protocol has not been shared. They're just women who happen to a bit masculine in appearance, just like some of the other boxers, and shot putters etc. No-one has proven otherwise, and there is no dispute as far as the Olympics are concerned. They certainly don't deserve the man hate they are getting from the likes of musk and rowling.

She failed a secretive test (unknown protocol or reliability) run by a discredited organisation, which has no relevance to the Olympics. She is biologically female, no evidence of xy chromosomes, no evidence of testicles, this whole argument is just weird. She's not transgender or intersex, this whole thing is based on baseless assumptions because of what the IBA did before they were suspended and stripped of their status.

So assuming that our retired bissy is the impeccable source that im sure they must be, nothing to do with immigration then, or his (Christian) parents, it seems like he was radicalised here very recently, so not an imported issue.

What would you want to do with the same kid if he happened to have British parents? Seems strange to single out kids differently depending on where their parents are from. It's the criminal aspect you need to tackle, not their heritage.

Which seems fair enough? You wouldn't want to deport a child of 10 yrs old who has only ever known the uk. (presumably?)

Much needed, although not a new position, but they could start with some investigative reporting into their own organisation too, it's nice to have posts like this at the junior end, but they need to look at their senior levels.

Badenoch has said she will focus on sovereignty, if that helps. I think this is primarily focused on getting rid of any pesky human rights or international laws. Also a lot of articles describe her as the 'darling of the rights because of her views on getting rid of disabled toilets / replacing them with gender specific ones.

I found this interesting, it's usa, so laws may be slightly different, but it shows how red mist can turn a self defence into an act of aggression. Police should know the laws, and what constitutes unreasonable force (clue, stamping on someone's head is over the line)

Using trans as a noun is not appropriate, but I do see outright transphobia, dead naming, deliberate mispronouns, and transphobic terms used on here without the outrage and corrections that fly when it is a certain poster making a mistake. Happy to denounce trans as a noun, would like to see this same response on the lgbt thread when transphobes are making their 'jokes' about transwomen too...

Not really, trump was decrepit for years and got through a whole term without his vp calling him out or pressure to stand down. This is a minor cover up in comparison.