In the news today...

[Phil71]

How is this monster even being considered for release from prison?

There are certain crimes that should carry a whole life sentence - and murdering three children and impaling their dead bodies on spiked railings for the mother to find should most certainly be included.

It's just incredible.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-h ... r-48039373

He killed a 4 year old, a 2 year old and a 9 month old baby in an especially gruesome way and he is being set free...

Is this a joke?

England's penal system is a disgrace.

Tell me about it.

There’s no way on this earth he should be freed.

[Va-Va-Voom]

It's unfathomable that they even considered granting him parole let alone actually doing it.

If anyone ever deserved the death penalty it's him.

McGreavy violently killed Samantha and then the other two children, each in a different manner. Eight-month-old Samantha died from a skull fracture, 2-year-old Dawn had her throat slit and 4-year-old Paul was strangled. After killing the three children, McGreavy went down to the basement and retrieved a pickaxe. He further mutilated their bodies with the pickaxe before impaling the three bodies on the spikes of a wrought iron fence in a neighbour's yard. He then left the home

No words

[UFGN]

It's unfathomable that they even considered granting him parole let alone actually doing it.

If anyone ever deserved the death penalty it's him.

McGreavy violently killed Samantha and then the other two children, each in a different manner. Eight-month-old Samantha died from a skull fracture, 2-year-old Dawn had her throat slit and 4-year-old Paul was strangled. After killing the three children, McGreavy went down to the basement and retrieved a pickaxe. He further mutilated their bodies with the pickaxe before impaling the three bodies on the spikes of a wrought iron fence in a neighbour's yard. He then left the home

No words

What is there to say except was there some sort of mental health issue going on

In any case for three child murders I don't know how he can ever see the light of day

I strongly doubt they'd actually release him.

I spose the law is the law. One day if Ian Huntley survives his minimum term he'll get a parole hearing. But they won't let him out

[Phil71]

It's unfathomable that they even considered granting him parole let alone actually doing it.

If anyone ever deserved the death penalty it's him.

McGreavy violently killed Samantha and then the other two children, each in a different manner. Eight-month-old Samantha died from a skull fracture, 2-year-old Dawn had her throat slit and 4-year-old Paul was strangled. After killing the three children, McGreavy went down to the basement and retrieved a pickaxe. He further mutilated their bodies with the pickaxe before impaling the three bodies on the spikes of a wrought iron fence in a neighbour's yard. He then left the home

No words

What is there to say except was there some sort of mental health issue going on

In any case for three child murders I don't know how he can ever see the light of day

I strongly doubt they'd actually release him.

I spose the law is the law. One day if Ian Huntley survives his minimum term he'll get a parole hearing. But they won't let him out

He’s been cleared for release. It’s just a matter of time.

[DiamondGooner]

You brought my f***ing name up remember? If you don't want a row don't f***ing start one

.............. and what if I did? wanna fight?

PS cant believe you actually missed the irony and went there with the Christmas thing. That was my point. People like you bringing up bullshit about the left being offended on others' behalf when in reality the story is just a stick used by the right wing MSM to beat the left and wind you up

Delete your account

Youve become a parody of yourself

Did they have this shop or is it a figment of the imagination? no it was real, so I'm not sure why you keep acting like this is fake news?

Also, I didn't post or find the link, I don't seek these things out I just reacted to the post so be quiet.

[LMAO]

Idk Aussie law, but I have no problem with this type of price discrimination. The free market will make the necessary corrections in situations like these (i.e., the business going under).

Maybe if the two chicks open a new restaurant, they'll learn from this and won't have such a shit business model.

The free market absolutely will not fix things like that. If a business charges premiums to black people, all history has taught us is that it will become the norm, not get frozen out by the free market.

This should be illegal

I'm not referring to all sectors. Of course there should be protections in certain industries like mobile telecommunications where there are a dearth of choices for the consumer or real estate where the value of one property won't be equivalent to another. (Even though sectors like mobile, everyone not a senior, part of the military, or an employee pays a premium. I don't have a problem with the seniors getting a discount because everyone has the opportunity to become part of that class.)

From context, I was referring to restaurants where there are a glut of them. If a restaurant owner wants to charge a premium to a certain class, then that's their choice. I may not agree with them doing so, but I can easily find another restaurant to take my patronage.

And history has also shown us that when black people were shunned from restaurants, they decided to take matters into their own hands and open their own. So, the free market still won in that case.

[UFGN]

Leaving it up to market economics doesn't work

It cant be allowed to stand for various reasons, one of them being as follows:

Idiot restaurant owner doesn't want to serve xyz group of people so they take their money elsewhere and he loses out. Whatever.

Now, using the same law say a group of idiots get together and buy a controlling stake in a big chain of restaurants and decree that xyz group aren't welcome in any of them. Suddenly that's a problem

Now imagine its a pharmacy instead of a restaurant. A much bigger problem. Now imagine the majority shareholding is in Boots (or Walgreens for our resident Americans)...... even bigger issue

It can't be allowed

[Va-Va-Voom]

Good point

[LMAO]

Now imagine its a pharmacy instead of a restaurant. A much bigger problem. Now imagine the majority shareholding is in Boots (or Walgreens for our resident Americans)...... even bigger issue

It can't be allowed

But price discrimination at pharmacies is already allowed, at least in America. Medicine and healthcare should be heavily regulated because they're vital to someone's health and well-being, but are not regulated as much as they should be because of the health insurance industry.

People have been denied coverage because they've exceeded their lifetime limit. People with pre-existing conditions have to pay more for insurance (or have been flat-out denied coverage), and by extension, doctors visits and medicine.

But a pharmacy isn't comparable to a restaurant. Other than food poisoning (which doesn't even fall under price discrimination), your health is hardly affected by (not) going to a certain eatery, thus shouldn't share the same protections as pharmacies.

Also going back to my example of the mobile telecomms industry, the pharma industry doesn't have many options for consumers. So far that reason too, it shouldn't be left to the devices of the free market.

[Phil71]

Wow. Is it really 20 years since the bombing of the Admiral Duncan?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47216594

[UFGN]

Prime Minister has sacked the Defence Secretary for, basically, treason

But apparently Corbyn is a threat to national security?

Ok

[LMAO]

It's not a huge scandal if it's your team doing it.

[Phil71]

I think the fact that we are considering the installation of vast amounts of technological infrastructure that's been manufactured by a Chinese state-controlled organisation is much more of a threat to our national security than some MP or other letting it slip during a bit of tittle tattle.

People in positions of influence should examine the real issue at hand rather than fishing for tiddlers.

[UFGN]

It's not a huge scandal if it's your team doing it.

If I understand correctly he leaked information to the press about a confidential National Security Council Meeting where the security services share information with the government

Back in the day he'd be in the Tower of London right about now with only a priest for company

[Phil71]

It's not a huge scandal if it's your team doing it.

If I understand correctly he leaked information to the press about a confidential National Security Council Meeting where the security services share information with the government

Back in the day he'd be in the Tower of London right about now with only a priest for company

It's hardly a state secret that the British government are considering giving a contract to Huawei if literally the whole of the world knows about it already.

Whoever leaked it was just confirming what everyone already knew.