Louis Redux

As a huge fan of rugby I think this is the best take I have ever seen.

However, I will now observe a minute's silence for your mentions.

The Red Roses men's team aren't very good, are they? #rugby

Something something every accusation is a confession something somethng.

Over the years these tiny minority, special interest groups have predicted so many important things.

Tiny, tiny, obscure groups. Like, you know, sex workers, trans people, gay people, brown people, and women.

Miniscule populations.

Teacher here. It's clear that most kids only ever see each other in school. They're either overexcited in the presence of their peers, or they're overwhelmed by it. Let your kids out of the house, they need unstructured time with people of their own age.

I have been in very similar situations.

In the deep past, obviously. I think my lovely wife would notice if there were low temperature ladies wafting about the place.

Blanket bothering damsels, dotted across the duvet? It would cause unrest.

Or orgies.

And, frankly, that just sounds like work.

Honestly, I just don't understand all the reporting on Epstein. The press are banging on about various things "...according to the 'philes...".

Why take the nonces' word for anything?

It's one rule for paedos and another for normal people. It's pollical correctness gone mad, I tell you.

NOW?!

Read books. It's been obvious since about Plato.

I really miss when you could buy something and it would last for most of your life without breaking or becoming obsolete. My dad used the same camera for 40 years. My grandad only had two cars in his lifetime. Meanwhile my year old phone has shit the bed because of a minor update

I imagine this account is stuck of hearing about flags, but here goes. Put a flag on your own property by all means, but fuck off with the lamp-post shit. Unless you own the lamp-post.

Again, we refer people back to Me Too. It was possible - actually quite easy - to get a very rich powerful man locked up with the proverbial key thrown away. That's *exactly why* the story suddenly turned into "this has gone too far", and all guns turned outwards.

Yeah you were right, our politicians, all the big tech guys who are also surveilling us 24/7, they're all paedos. Also the government is massively overreaching its powers to kill civilians and squash protest. Isn’t this the time you rise up and start opposing some of this or what lol

The funny thing about a certain type of angry conspiracy guy is that they’re literally being confronted with an elite paedophile ring and a tyrannical government at the same time right now, and because it isn't being done by the people they wanted it to be done by they’re all being pussies about it

All the anti-war and anti-occupation protestors were right. All the far leftists were right. All the “woke scolds” and your friend who’s “too woke” were right. They were somehow even more right than they may have realized at the time. But really, it was always obvious they were right.

Not as bad as the fact that, to some heterosexual men, Liz Truss is the UK's most shaggable ever PM.

Let it sink in.

Then go gay for Disraeli.

~90% of Fesshole has me muttering: "JUST TALK TO THEM!"

The caps are not due to the volume of the mutter, but due to the stupidity/unpleasantness of the people supposedly involved.

This meeting could have been an email. This YT video could have been a blog. This Fess could have been an honest discussion with your spouse/child/parent.

This is, in fact, the moderate position

Periodic reminder: We do not live under capitalism or democracy. We live under oligarchy. Oligarchy more controlling and intrusive than Orwell dreamed of.


Too many of us just haven't noticed the dystopia yet.

Nope. VPNs etc are, whether or not they are used for any other purpose, foremost and fundamentally derived from the right to basic privacy

It used to be understood that governments and corporations justify themselves (however poorly this was done) to citizens and customers, not the other way around

Reading? Nuance? A Jedi craves not these things...

The Pavlovian, knee-jerk reaction of many to this would be to say that the security services sometimes need not to reveal the full position. Sometimes national security can take priority. But the Hillsborough law campaigners fully accept this. The question is who decides. As the Guardian reports: “The families say individual officers should provide their evidence to any inquiry with a duty of candour, and if the intelligence service heads argue it should be excluded on national security grounds they should make an application for that to be determined by the inquiry chair. In other words: the heads of the security services should not mark their own homework. If something needs to be excluded on national security grounds then it should be for an independent (and security-cleared) court to decide. And this is not unusual: it is similar to the public interest immunity regime for excluding sensitive evidence from open court proceedings. That regime has been in place for a long time, and the sky has not fallen in.

And for those who fret "what about national security?" let's see if they read down to this:

We have security services which the prime minister and the highest judges say have misled the court and which another senior judge said in an inquiry report do not present accurate pictures and instead give retrospective justifications for their actions. And these are the instances we know about. The Hillsborough law campaigners are right to resist this late amendment, and the government should provide that any exemption of the duty of candour on national security grounds should be independently assessed from those who assert it. And that is how the national interest would be best served.

NEW

Why the Hillsborough law campaigners are right to be resolute

The attempts to water down the duty of candour should be resisted

Me at @prospectmagazine.co.uk

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/law/th...

He's right, you know...