 | Forum
Reply | Abdulai scores after 6 minutes
at 20:22 28 Jan 2025
0-4 after 34 minutes and Abdulai has been quiet since his goals. I think the big picture is that Exeter have no central defenders available so they are wide open. |
| Forum
Reply | Abdulai scores after 6 minutes
at 20:08 28 Jan 2025
Not many starts but counting sub appearances 13 games. Still can't deny he got off to a dynamite start for Orient. |
| Forum
Reply | Abdulai
at 20:04 28 Jan 2025
Third was a 25 yard wonder strike mind that clipped the post in the top corner. |
| Forum
Thread | Abdulai scores after 6 minutes
at 19:54 28 Jan 2025
Playing for Leyton Orient tonight along with 39 year old Darren Pratley.
Abdulai scores a 2nd after 7 minutes.
Is showing more form in 7 minutes here than he did in 13 games with us.
It may be partly because Exeter's defence has been ravaged by injuries and the recall of Crama to Brentford for sale to Millwall.
Edit: several of us posted at the same time. [Post edited 28 Jan 19:58]
|
| Forum
Thread | Yvette struggles with “Rapid Analytical Sprint” Report on Extremism
at 07:19 28 Jan 2025
Yvette Copper looks set to reject the findings of the Home Office rapid review of policy on extremism that she commissioned. Among other things the report brands the idea of two-tier policing as an example of a "right-wing extremist narrative", and says that “right
wing extremists frequently exploit cases of alleged group-based sexual abuse to promote anti-Muslim sentiment as well as anti-government and anti-‘political correctness’ narratives”. It suggests that the definitions of extremism should centre more on behaviour than ideology, implying less focus on Islamist and far right extremism. Among other things, it suggests that misogyny should come under the extremist umbrella. Another controversial recommendation is for more rather than less action to deal with "non-crime hate incidents".
Here is the Policy Exchange's reaction to the report.
https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/extremely-confused/
The report seems to be a perplexing mix of the sensible and the silly. Some will think it gives a revealing insight into the mindset of senior Home Office officials.
|
| Forum
Reply | The inner chimp
at 11:21 27 Jan 2025
Does anybody remember the monkeys that were kept in a cage in Brynmill Park years ago? They were quite active, though not solitary! |
| Forum
Reply | The inner chimp
at 05:08 27 Jan 2025
The book The Chimp Paradox seems to have really caught on, especially in sports psychology. It looks as though Steve Peters has made a very good career by sexing up Freud (see id, ego and superego). |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:43 26 Jan 2025
The point about interpretation is pertinent. Anybody who had a passing awareness of the large"law in action" literature would realise that operational guidance on the application of law developed by front line organisations and agents can evolve over time, often without any change in the primary legislation. That is why the phrase "In the eyes of the law" caught my attention a few posts ago. [Post edited 26 Jan 18:53]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:25 26 Jan 2025
Yet again you do not provide your detailed reasoning as to why Ms Littlewood's comments are incorrect. As we saw when I gave examples of a couple of KCs who took a different view to you on another matter, professionals working in a given field may well have different views about what is going on and the way forward. They then need to put forward arguments about why their view should be heard rather than that of a fellow professional, so that observers can judge who is right.
Edit. I see you have realised that "believe me because of the identity I claim" is insufficient and added a couple of sentences. I thought what Ms Littlewood said was quite plausible, and would have been interested to hear exactly where she went wrong. [Post edited 26 Jan 18:32]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 17:01 26 Jan 2025
You seem to have better inside knowledge than Ms Littlewood, who worked as a Prevent counter-terrorism officer! Are you offering an informed view after reading her article at the link? Is she mistaken? A little bit of background reasoning rather than just repeating a general point, which others may dispute, would be helpful. [Post edited 26 Jan 17:10]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 11:36 26 Jan 2025
The newspapers continue to ask questions about how Prevent counter-terrorism officers approached the case. There is an article in the Sunday Times today, based on a redacted version of a Home Office Prevent Learning Review, that alleges serious shortcomings.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/case-closed-how-southport-killer-was-l
Two of the issues are whether the case was closed too soon, and if there was effective liaison with other agencies. The article quotes the original case notes as saying: “Case closed. Concerns related to Prevent were explored. Did not appear to be linked to an ideology or vulnerability to radicalisation. Vulnerability and needs were identified but these were being met by other safeguarding and other agencies. Case closed to Prevent but triaged to other services”. Rudakabana’s interest in online reports of various mass killings and terrorist acts was considered by the Prevent team to be only an “interest in world news”. He was not referred on to a second stage of Prevent known as “Channel”, in which experts investigate an individual’s views and circumstances in greater depth.
An interesting comment in the Metro newspaper comes from Charlotte Littlewood, a former Prevent officer. She raises questions both about whether the existing definition of terrorism was wide enough to apply to this case, and also suggests that she would have done things differently under the present framework.
“It can be assumed, from my experience, that, after Merseyside Police found he had ‘an unhealthy obsession with extreme violence’, that a call would have come into the local Prevent team with his referral. (…) This referral means Prevent officers would have been tasked to fill in a risk assessment, to ascertain did this individual meet the threshold for intervention; was he a terror risk? The form includes a list of potential ideologies, and questions related to the capacity for violence. If it had come across my desk I would have noted the potential for a far-left anti-racism ideology being present in this instance, alongside a verbalised intent to commit violence and the capability to do so. (...)
Ultimately we will never know if steps within Prevent would have prevented this heinous crime, but the chances of him becoming so dangerously obsessed with violence could have substantially reduced and, in my view, the attack could have been prevented all-together. It is clear that we need to gain a better understanding of the Mixed Unclear Unstable (MUU) category of cases that, in 2020, made up half of Prevent’s case load, therefore the ideology with the highest number of referrals. MUU can catch cases like Rudakubana where violence is the priority and ideology is more of an inspiration than a fully adopted identity and motive, as opposed to the more defined categories of ‘Extreme Right Wing’ or ‘Islamist’. It can also be cases of individuals who merge ideologies to create a new identity.”
https://metro.co.uk/2025/01/23/worked-prevent-went-wrong-axel-rudakubana-2241790
Probably, there will be a debate between those who see this as an isolated case of a solitary individual with mental health issues (“neuro-diversity” etc) going out of control, and those who think this is one of a string of cases where lone individuals disaffected with the society around them try to kill multiple people to hurt that society. Those who take the latter view are likely to ask whether ethnicity, perceived racial tensions and MUU ideologies enter the picture. Others may still argue that the attacks simply reflect an individual’s pathological desire to kill, but I don’t think we should discount the performative aspect of the Southport killings, the idea that the choice of targets – young white girls – was designed to shock and hurt a wider public that would react to the event.
I think the inquiry should be wide and leave open the possibility that this was a form of terrorism. It should not start by assuming that the CPS report and the judge’s comments already tell us most of what we need to know. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 20:45 25 Jan 2025
If by "in the eyes of the law" you mean in the opinion of the trial judge, then yes. But what I had in mind is the range of motivated behaviour covered by the legislation. My point was that there was a path to an offence under the 2000 Act that does not not involve a political, ideological or religious motive. With the right evidence, a charge could have been made in respect of a racial "cause" under the provision added in 2009. This is an evidential matter concerning motivation, rather than a question of what the Act ("the law") covers. If the motivation discovered falls into any one of the four categories in s1(1)c then terrorism may have been involved. The CPS guidance on charging under the Terrorist Act, 2000 indicates that "cause" (the wording of the Act) can be construed as motivation. I accept that no clear evidence of a racial motivation has been reported in statements from the key stakeholders, but if such evidence had been found then Rudakabana could have been charged under the provisions of the Act. The idea that any evidence discovered about a racial aspect would certainly have been reported seems to me to be too kind to the authorities, whom we know from past cases may prefer to frame events in one way rather than another.. That is why I felt your earlier posts may have framed the range of motivational possibilities too narrowly. Personally, I still believe that Rudakabana may have been motivated by resentment based on his experiences with a majority population that he perceived as racially different from him. It seems to me that it is appropriate for the Inquiry to consider that possibility, irrespective of the charge that led to imprisonment. I still think there is a debate to be had about whether the Southport killings were a form of terrorism. |
| Forum
Reply | All this Budget Speculation
at 14:26 25 Jan 2025
Yep, that misguided talk from some about adults now being in the room keeps coming back to me. Sixth formers may indeed be more accurate. |
| Forum
Reply | Norwich City v Swansea City : Mach day thread
at 13:27 25 Jan 2025
Deja vu really; lots of possession but inability to convert chances and a mistake in us at the back. I suppose some will say we have been unlucky on the balance of play, but the same pattern seems to be repeated most weeks. |
| Forum
Reply | Number of Welsh-speakers lowest in eight years
at 08:47 25 Jan 2025
I can understand the wish to maintain the use of the Welsh language for those who wish to speak it. My concern is that the legal requirement for certain organisations to comply with the Welsh Language Standards causes major inconvenience and costs, so that things have gone too far.
To take one example in an organisation known to me, all emails sent to more than one person (except where the language of all is known not to be Welsh) should be bilingual in Welsh and English. All official emails come around with the Welsh version first, and I often wonder how much time the English-speaking majority spend in scrolling down before they can understand what the message is about, Should an English language monoglot employee wish to send an email to multiple colleagues, for instance to notify others of a forthcoming event, they must send the message to the translation unit, which requires several days notice.
More generally all service users have a right to conduct their dealings with the organisation in Welsh. As most employees do not speak Welsh this again means that they must be assisted by a specialist unit when this need arises. If over a short period a larger number of service users insisted that all communication did take place in Welsh then the organisation would have nowhere near the capacity to deliver that. You might very well say that the answer at that stage would be to employ more Welsh speakers to cope with the demand, but as the organisation contains employees with various types of specialist expertise, I cannot see that this would be possible., [Post edited 25 Jan 9:54]
|
| | AnotherJohn
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 1122 | | Comment Votes: | 1 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 1123 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.