Politics & Stuff

[Vesper 30,085]

Dr Hannibal Lecter Addresses Trump

 

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

A true believer until the end.....

[Vesper 30,085]

Trump’s War on Woke

[Vesper 30,085]

[Vesper 30,085]

'Unified Reich': Trump campaign goes full Nazi

Donald Trump's campaign adopts Nazi framing, again

https://www.theframelab.org/unified-reich-trump-campaign-goes-full-nazi/

In a shocking development – even by the Republican Party's low, low standards – Donald Trump has directly framed his campaign using Nazi terminology.

A video posted on his social media accounts yesterday promised a "unified Reich" if he wins the presidency in 2024.

From the Associated Press:

A video posted to Donald Trump’s account on his social media network Monday included references to a “unified Reich” among hypothetical news headlines if he wins the election in November.

The headline appears among messages flashing across the screen such as “Trump wins!!” and “Economy booms!” Other headlines appear to be references to World War I.

The word “Reich” is often largely associated with Nazi Germany’s Third Reich, though the references in the video Trump shared appear to be a reference to the formation of the modern pan-German nation, unifying smaller states into a single Reich, or empire, in 1871.

Trump’s social media account shares a campaign video with a headline about a ‘unified Reich’

A video posted to Donald Trump’s account on his social media network Monday included references to a “unified Reich.”

AP NewsMICHELLE L. PRICE

Trump promises "unified Reich"

As the AP story points out, this is not the first time Trump has framed his campaign in Nazi terms. In recent years, he has used the words of Adolf Hitler to attack immigrants, has dined with Holocaust deniers and has downplayed "the 2017 rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, where white nationalists chanted 'Jews will not replace us!'" Retired Marine General John Kelly, Trump's former chief of staff, quoted Trump as praising Hitler.

 

The Trump campaign says the 30-second ad was erroneously posted by a staffer and says it wasn't aware of the "reich" language before it shared the video with Trump's millions of social media followers.

We don't buy this excuse. There's no way a presidential campaign would post a video without conducting a thorough vetting at multiple levels. This was clearly an intentional provocation as part of Trump's "trial balloon" strategy in which he floats offensive or outrageous ideas to test public reaction.

Trump is telling us exactly what he plans to do if he gets another term. He is framing his return to power as an authoritarian effort, and he is overtly using Nazi language and symbolism to drive home the point.

This wasn't a mistake. It isn't a joke. American freedom and democracy are on the line in 2024. The main headline in Trump's ad asks: "What's Next for America?" Trump's answer: authoritarianism and fascism.

So what can you do? For starters, you can make sure to send the AP story to everyone you know by sharing this link: https://apnews.com/article/trump-election-2024-rhetoric-germany-antisemitism-31002afb91b642c0314223d19e51f427#fa

The stakes of this election couldn't be any higher. Trump is telling us exactly who he is – and what's in store for our future if he gets a second term.

Every one of us has a moral duty to prevent that from happening.

[Vesper 30,085]

Rishi Sunak takes gamble by calling UK general election for 4 July

PM announces date with Tories trailing Labour by 20 points in polls, saying: ‘I’m confident about what we can do in the future’

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/22/rishi-sunak-will-call-general-election-for-july-in-surprise-move-sources

 

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

How phoney are the right wing loonies ?
Just answered a question in quora about guns in America.
The Trump man above had posted a pic from Schindler's list, the one with Amon Goth trying to shoot Itzhak Stern but finds that his pistol does n't fire.
He says "this is what will happen to the Americans when Biden takes away our guns".
I tried to reason with him.
I says "my good man if the nazis attack then only Jimmy Doolittle saves America - you can't do it with your toy gun".
I go on and explain to him that private guns to combat common criime are likewise near useless and that guns are useful only if somebody is on his toes 24-365.
Further I says "if you still think you have a point, tell us what to do about the psycho killers who are roaming America and represent the main danger. Must n't we address all problems ?"

After that the man is in stitches.
He calls me all the names in his nazi book: filthy inferior African specimen - antisemite (!) - commie ...
Closes the conversation by heil hitlering me, disallows further replies.

Similar things happen with me and the (true) lefties. Mercy !
 

Edited May 23, 2024 by cosmicway

[KEVINAA 129]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_San_Pedro_Garza_Garcia_Stage_Collapse

2024 San Pedro Garza Garcia Stage Collapse

On May 22, 2024 a political campaign rally pertaining to the mexican political party Movimiento Ciudadano in San Pedro Garza Garcia collapsed on a group of spectators leaving many injured and 4 dead as of right now.

https://www.mystateline.com/news/international/ap-high-wind-topples-part-of-stage-and-sends-a-mexican-presidential-candidate-running-for-safety/

Stage Collapses at Political Rally in Mexico - LIVE Breaking News Coverage (Nuevo León)

 

 

Edited May 23, 2024 by KEVINAA

[Vesper 30,085]

[Vesper 30,085]

Medical experts are unwilling to give evidence in gender cases

Trolling and the toxic debate surrounding giving children puberty blockers or hormonal treatment is putting specialists off appearing in court

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/medical-experts-are-unwilling-to-give-evidence-in-gender-cases-jmhts3b0t

Courts are struggling to find experts willing to give medical evidence in family law disputes about young people who want hormone treatment to change gender.

Judges in two High Court rulings this month in disputes over whether puberty blockers or gender-affirming hormones should be given to a person younger than 18 noted the lack of any medical expert in the UK willing to give evidence.

In one Mrs Justice Judd lifted an interim order that had been in place since last October preventing a father from arranging for Q, then 15, to access treatment for gender dysphoria from a private clinic. The mother had agreed that Q should join the waiting list for NHS treatment, but did not agree to the child accessing it privately. Waiting lists mean that Q would not be assessed or treated by the NHS until after turning 18.

The father of the child, now 16, who was born female but identifies as male, agreed to an undertaking not to fund or facilitate a referral to an offshore body such as Gender GP while Q remains younger than 18. The judge said it had “proved to be impossible to find a consultant endocrinologist in this country who was prepared to give expert evidence”.

In the first ruling on transgender medical issues that considered the Cass review — which found there was “no good evidence” to support giving young people potentially life-altering hormone treatment — the judge blamed “the toxicity of the debate” for the fact that it had not been possible to get medical evidence.

“Whilst there is a paucity of experts in some disciplines … I have never encountered a case where there was simply no one willing to provide such evidence for the court,” the judge said.

Quoting from the Cass review, the judge said: “There are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media, and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour.”

A week earlier, Sir Andrew McFarlane, the most senior family court judge, said in a ruling that there was “very significant concern” over children “accessing cross-hormone treatment from any offshore, online, unregulated private clinic”.

He had heard evidence from a paediatric endocrinologist based in Australia that the dosage of hormones prescribed to one teenager by the clinic, GenderGP, after a single online consultation with a counsellor, was so high it was “dangerously high” and “frankly negligent”.

Despite an “extensive” exercise, McFarlane said that it had been impossible to identify an endocrinologist in the UK who was prepared to give evidence.

In a speech in 2018 McFarlane highlighted the “acute problem” of finding medical experts for cases in the family courts, which he said was in part because of strict court timetables and exacerbated by cuts to legal aid fees.

McFarlane established a working group to look at the problem. Its report, published in 2020, confirmed country-wide difficulties and a “diminishing” pool of experts in specialisms, including child and family psychiatrists and psychologists, paediatricians, radiologists, neurosurgeons, ophthalmologists, haematologists, neonatologists and geneticists.

As well as low fees, court timetabling, processes and the volume of material, and a lack of support and training, it found that criticism by lawyers, judges and the press contributed to the unwillingness to appear.

Half of the 635 polled in the 2022 Bond Solon expert witness survey said that they would refuse to act in “highly contentious” matters, such as those involving transgender issues.

Mark Solon, a solicitor and founder of the expert witness training company, says: “As society changes, so does the need for expert witnesses to assist courts with an independent opinion on issues in disputes that are often highly contentious, and where new attitudes and evidence need examination. Gender is one such issue.”

Solon says it can be difficult to find an expert with the relevant qualifications and experience, knowledge and skills to produce a court-compliant report and be able to handle potentially hostile cross-examination. He predicts that using experts from abroad to fill the gap may become more common.

In addition to criticism that the limited number of trans specialists may receive if they comment on the “highly contentious” subject, Simon Berney-Edwards, the chief executive of Expert Witness Institute, says they are also likely to be subjected to vexatious complaints and harassment.

Paul Conrathe, the solicitor at Sinclairslaw who represented Q’s mother, says that he has spoken to many potential expert witnesses, who express “concerns about being personally vilified and that the grief is not worth it”. In particular he argues that there is a “hostile and intimidating environment for anyone that seeks to question an affirmative approach to hormonal treatment”.

Conrathe argues that anonymity may encourage more experts to participate in the court process — something that judges already have the power to grant if circumstances allow.

James Roberts KC, chair of the Family Law Bar Association, says that the difficulty in identifying experts in trans cases results from the complex issues in dispute — but he accepts the wider problems of finding experts at legal aid rates.

The Association of Lawyers for Children adds that the Cass review and wider public debate about the treatment of children with gender dysphoria, is “likely” to act as a further disincentive. While others suggest that the pilot to allow journalists to report on family court proceedings, which started in January, may add to the problem.

[YorkshireBlue 3,264]

5 minutes ago, Vesper said:

Medical experts are unwilling to give evidence in gender cases

Trolling and the toxic debate surrounding giving children puberty blockers or hormonal treatment is putting specialists off appearing in court

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/medical-experts-are-unwilling-to-give-evidence-in-gender-cases-jmhts3b0t

Courts are struggling to find experts willing to give medical evidence in family law disputes about young people who want hormone treatment to change gender.

Judges in two High Court rulings this month in disputes over whether puberty blockers or gender-affirming hormones should be given to a person younger than 18 noted the lack of any medical expert in the UK willing to give evidence.

In one Mrs Justice Judd lifted an interim order that had been in place since last October preventing a father from arranging for Q, then 15, to access treatment for gender dysphoria from a private clinic. The mother had agreed that Q should join the waiting list for NHS treatment, but did not agree to the child accessing it privately. Waiting lists mean that Q would not be assessed or treated by the NHS until after turning 18.

The father of the child, now 16, who was born female but identifies as male, agreed to an undertaking not to fund or facilitate a referral to an offshore body such as Gender GP while Q remains younger than 18. The judge said it had “proved to be impossible to find a consultant endocrinologist in this country who was prepared to give expert evidence”.

In the first ruling on transgender medical issues that considered the Cass review — which found there was “no good evidence” to support giving young people potentially life-altering hormone treatment — the judge blamed “the toxicity of the debate” for the fact that it had not been possible to get medical evidence.

“Whilst there is a paucity of experts in some disciplines … I have never encountered a case where there was simply no one willing to provide such evidence for the court,” the judge said.

Quoting from the Cass review, the judge said: “There are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media, and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour.”

A week earlier, Sir Andrew McFarlane, the most senior family court judge, said in a ruling that there was “very significant concern” over children “accessing cross-hormone treatment from any offshore, online, unregulated private clinic”.

He had heard evidence from a paediatric endocrinologist based in Australia that the dosage of hormones prescribed to one teenager by the clinic, GenderGP, after a single online consultation with a counsellor, was so high it was “dangerously high” and “frankly negligent”.

Despite an “extensive” exercise, McFarlane said that it had been impossible to identify an endocrinologist in the UK who was prepared to give evidence.

In a speech in 2018 McFarlane highlighted the “acute problem” of finding medical experts for cases in the family courts, which he said was in part because of strict court timetables and exacerbated by cuts to legal aid fees.

McFarlane established a working group to look at the problem. Its report, published in 2020, confirmed country-wide difficulties and a “diminishing” pool of experts in specialisms, including child and family psychiatrists and psychologists, paediatricians, radiologists, neurosurgeons, ophthalmologists, haematologists, neonatologists and geneticists.

As well as low fees, court timetabling, processes and the volume of material, and a lack of support and training, it found that criticism by lawyers, judges and the press contributed to the unwillingness to appear.

Half of the 635 polled in the 2022 Bond Solon expert witness survey said that they would refuse to act in “highly contentious” matters, such as those involving transgender issues.

Mark Solon, a solicitor and founder of the expert witness training company, says: “As society changes, so does the need for expert witnesses to assist courts with an independent opinion on issues in disputes that are often highly contentious, and where new attitudes and evidence need examination. Gender is one such issue.”

Solon says it can be difficult to find an expert with the relevant qualifications and experience, knowledge and skills to produce a court-compliant report and be able to handle potentially hostile cross-examination. He predicts that using experts from abroad to fill the gap may become more common.

In addition to criticism that the limited number of trans specialists may receive if they comment on the “highly contentious” subject, Simon Berney-Edwards, the chief executive of Expert Witness Institute, says they are also likely to be subjected to vexatious complaints and harassment.

Paul Conrathe, the solicitor at Sinclairslaw who represented Q’s mother, says that he has spoken to many potential expert witnesses, who express “concerns about being personally vilified and that the grief is not worth it”. In particular he argues that there is a “hostile and intimidating environment for anyone that seeks to question an affirmative approach to hormonal treatment”.

Conrathe argues that anonymity may encourage more experts to participate in the court process — something that judges already have the power to grant if circumstances allow.

James Roberts KC, chair of the Family Law Bar Association, says that the difficulty in identifying experts in trans cases results from the complex issues in dispute — but he accepts the wider problems of finding experts at legal aid rates.

The Association of Lawyers for Children adds that the Cass review and wider public debate about the treatment of children with gender dysphoria, is “likely” to act as a further disincentive. While others suggest that the pilot to allow journalists to report on family court proceedings, which started in January, may add to the problem.

They need a back bone, giving children such things isn't only stupid it's disgusting, children can't drink can't smoke can't drive can't work, still in education some can't even do there times tables yet are in a position to decide if they want to change sex? The fact this is even a debate is beyond belief and the parents who allow this should have there kids taken of them for abuse, because 9x out of 10 it's these idiots forcing it onto them in the first place!!!

Edited May 23, 2024 by YorkshireBlue

[Vesper 30,085]

Sunak facing election exodus of Tory MPs

Number of Conservatives standing down rises to 72

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-general-election-live-latest-news-rishi-sunak-3wgrf5nl2

Key moments

 

Number of Tory MPs standing down reaches 72

 

Conservatives are the underdog, Mordaunt says

 

Tories panicking over Reform UK: Anderson

 

Reform UK will field 630 candidates

 

Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer held a series of events across the UK on the first full day of the general election campaign.

Sunak has begun a two-day tour of the four nations as he seeks to pull off the biggest political comeback in history at the general election on July 4. Starmer, meanwhile, hosted an event with Angela Rayner as he seeks to kickstart his own campaign after the prime minister’s surprise announcement yesterday.

 

[Vesper 30,085]

Michael Gove steps down in mass exodus of MPs before election

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cv22pk09478o

 

[cosmicway 1,333]

Bookies "certain" of Trump victory now, especially after Haley's supportive statement.
Trump = 1.72, Biden = 2.37.
In my view the wokes are to blame for this and the idiotic pro-Hamas demonstrators.

[Fernando 6,585]

It's like I been saying. This was telegraph long ago, Trump is clearly the favorite to win this election. 

But I have a feeling he will not finish the whole term.... Something will happen.