12gauge82

As much as we're told we live in a free country with a sound democracy, recent events and scandals including political correctness, Brexit, the post office, illegal immigration, freedom of speech and rape gangs says otherwise. They and many other issues have been either covered up or forced upon UK citizens with no mandate to do so, by political party's which at their core, share the same ideology that is directly opposed to the population they are supposed to serve, but have forced it upon us anyway. We all moan about it, but the first step to change any of that, is to put people in power who will listen to us, the people and carry out our wishes. To expect that from either the Conservatives or Labour is utter madness and will never happen. In summary, if we want change, the first step towards that is to vote it in.

Here's a longer version of this video, which in my opinion is even worse. Watching Khan pretend to not know what he was being asked simply makes him appear to be complicit in trying to cover up issues in my opinion.

Or not and be kept hidden forever.

I'm not usally shy in giving my opinions on subjects. But I genuinely don't even know where to begin with the failures and cowardice of all our government and their institutions. What I do know is it's a disgrace, the most sickening cover up I've seen in my time. How anyone who turned a blind eye to this can live with themselves is beyond me. We need new government now and every household needs to write to their MP demanding an immediate and full national enquiry.

While not everyones cup of tea, including mine, respectfully, I think you, like many other people, have underestimated him, but I respect your opinion 👍

I think it's rife in modern day life, it's just not often vultures like these get caught out. I've seen some very nasty individuals being praised in the media constantly and yet people in the know, know them to be some of the greediest, self centred uncharitable people you could think of. They're just very good at PR and know they can gain from a gullible public. I'm suspicious of anyone in the media for being a saint, while there are many genuine case of incredibly decent, hardworking and charitable people, I always wonder how the media found out.

+1

Ive never been a fan of Trump, I don't like the way he speaks, he appears arrogant, boastful and at times disrespectful and always considered him a bit of a narcissist. All that said, I can't deny my negative opinions of him have shifted, while I still find the language he uses to be at best un-diplomatic, there have been several events that have led me to believe, nobody can question his determination, belief in his own set of principles and ability to lead and get things done. He's just secured a cease fire between Israel and Palestine before even taking office, beaten an obvious attempt at politically motivated lawfair, won a second term in office, despite clear media bias, was the first American leader to visit North Korea, is clearly respected by strong man dictators around the world, and crucially for me, although less of a measureble achievement, showed great courage during a very nearly successful assassination attempt, which stood out for me, as his bravery in the face of near death is not something someone can fain, I felt it was a glimpse at his inner self that couldn't be faked. I believe most world leaders would have understandably cowered behind their security.

I'm sure they'll have a go at some point. Either way the West needs to vastly increase it's defence budget. We seem to very quickly forget the lessons of the past.

No, they need to hold an honest held belief and acted reasonably considering that belief. A jury would decide if their actions were reasonable. That also applies to you and I and is good sense, because without that, you would have to wait to be assaulted or killed before you could take any action to defend yourself or someone else, which would be a bit problematic, because where firearms are involved you likely be to dead to.

I didn't say you had?

So your not going to quote where you claim I said Harry Stanley deserverd to be shot then? You have now quoted the word potentially and hold that up as some sort of revelation, the thing is, in real life dangerous situations where you or someone else can get shot, you know not on a video game or when shooting at targets, there are all sorts of unknowns or potential dangers, the police and military are humans, they don't have crystal balls or superhuman reflexs, knowledge or vision, all they can do is work with the information and intelligence available to them at the time and deal with whatever life threatening situation they're thrown into, acting lawfully and proportionately to any potential (there's that word again) threats they face and their honest held belief they had at the time. I'm glad I haven't got to make those decisions and even more glad that you don't either.

Please quote where I said "he deserved to be shot" Obviously you can't because I didn't say it. In fact quote anything I've said that is factually wrong. You can't because there isn't anything. You seem to struggle to understand the complexity of dealing with a situation like a potentially dangerous and/or armed individual and it's not like the movies where everything is black and white. I guess it's a good job your not an armed police officer, you would clearly lack the mental capacity to do the job.

Your putting words in my mouth. Of course he didn't deserve to be shot. The case was a tragedy. What I said, was the officers actions were justified. They acted reasonably along the lines of their honest held belief at the time of their actions. We can't judge people using hindsight they didn't have at the time.