Comments by "TruthWarrior" (@Truth-warrior-j3e) on "British Stand" channel.

  1.  @davids8449  very sad indeed. All the more reason why it is perfectly moral that you do not subside my heating bill anymore.
    2
  2. One of the most stupid comments I have seen on here. And that is saying something!
    2
  3. Actually its when people like ‘British Stand’ come up with utter garbage
    2
  4. You probably find it really strange because it’s not actually true.
    2
  5. By having the confidence of Parliament unlike, for example, Boris Johnson who resigned before he was about to be suspended.
    2
  6.  @jessiegleaves9037  incorrect: he resigned because he was about to be suspended for deliberately and intentionally lying to parliament. The first time in parliamentary history a sitting prime minister has been censured in this way. It’s called being held to account.
    2
  7. Because it is morally unfair for poor pensioners to have to pay for the heating bills of rich ones.
    2
  8. Well perhaps, but only just as far as politicians are concerned. And by a fraction and significant statistical margin of error. Keir Starmer is facing a significant drop in popularity in the UK, with recent polls showing that 63% of people have an unfavorable view of him. This has led to comparisons with Nigel Farage, another divisive figure in British politics. While Starmer’s unfavorability rating sits at -36, Farage’s is just slightly better at -35. This decline comes despite Labour’s landslide victory in the general election just three months ago. The unpopularity extends to Starmer’s Cabinet as well, with no minister holding a positive approval rating at the moment. While Starmer may not be “the most hated man in England,” he is certainly facing widespread discontent, particularly after Labour’s handling of key policies and internal issues
    2
  9. Well that’s not true is it. Contempt of court is a serious offence and imprisonment is a justified response when the administration of justice is at risk. Got it?
    2
  10. This claim is demonstrably false based on crime statistics, historical precedent, and criminological research. Crime is a human issue, not a religious one. Just look at the actual crime statistics. Your comment is a perfect example of the fallacy of composition.
    1
  11. @HenryWilkinson-c5n Facts: The assertion that “serious crime is always committed by Muslims” is factually incorrect. Empirical data from various countries demonstrate that individuals from diverse religious backgrounds engage in serious crimes. For instance, in England and Wales as of March 2024, 44.5% of prisoners identified as Christian, 30.9% reported no religious affiliation, and 18.1% identified as Muslim. This indicates that a significant portion of the prison population comprises non-Muslims.  In the United States, data from the Pew Research Center indicates that Muslims constitute approximately 9% of the prison population, while Christians make up about two-thirds. This further illustrates that serious crimes are committed by individuals across various religious affiliations.  Moreover, research examining the relationship between religion and crime has found that higher levels of religiosity are often associated with lower levels of criminal behavior. A meta-analysis published in the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency concluded that “religious beliefs and behaviors exert a moderate deterrent effect on individuals’ criminal behavior.”  These findings collectively refute the claim that serious crime is exclusively or predominantly committed by Muslims. The continual statements spreading fake news about Muslims or non white is exactly the same as the racist ideology of nazi propaganda that attempted to blame Jews for all world problems. There is no difference ion the assertions. They are all examples of the fallacy of composition. To observe that a handful of Brits get drunk in Spain and commit crime does not mean that all Brits are therefore criminals. Face facts. Not bias.
    1
  12.  @janebruce6625  except that it is not the only part of the Human Rights Act. The Freedom of Expression rights protected are many but not absolute. Specifically is can be restricted for reasons including national security, public safety, prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or morals, or the protection of the reputation or rights of others.
    1
  13. Which part of that clip is evidence of someone claiming an allowance fraudulently? This is shoddy journalism at its absolute worst.
    1
  14.  @wendystrachan3240  And your evidence is?
    1
  15.  @elsiecook2259  just someone who can do fact checking before making totally misleading statements. But Im all ears, in what way is the Poll debased? You do know how evidence works dont you? Saying something is so doesn’t make it so. What are you afraid of? Come on, give it a go, try using evidence and reasoned argument instead of unquantifiable statements. What have you got to loose? “A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence." — David Hume.
    1
  16. This is how it works. The main or “primary” questions are usually submitted in advance, often several days before the session. These questions are published in the Order Paper, a daily agenda of parliamentary business. Ministers receive copies of these questions, giving them time to prepare detailed responses with the help of their civil servants and advisors. All ministers have pre prepared answers to these main questions. Then come Supplementary Questions: While ministers know the primary questions in advance, they do not know the supplementary questions that may follow. After the minister answers the primary question, the MP who asked it, along with other MPs, can ask follow-up or supplementary questions. These are often more challenging, as they can be spontaneous and are not provided in advance though of course the relevant minister will have tried to prepare in advance for likely supplementary questions.
    1
  17.  @jovickers5313  except the actual evidence doesnt support that idea at all. It’s not why they are coming. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the majority of immigrants do not come to the UK for “handouts” or free housing. Instead, they are driven by economic opportunities, education, and sometimes, the need for refuge from danger. Strict visa conditions, limited access to welfare, and the significant contribution they make to the UK economy further debunk the myth of immigrants seeking benefits.
    1
  18.  @gregorytremaine1164  Define “Indigenous European Peoples” please
    1
  19.  @hazelbruce4766  and what exactly do you mean by that?
    1
  20. Undocumented migrants are not allowed to work
    1
  21. And your point is?
    1
  22. And what exactly does that mean?
    1
  23.  @garyhall3919 true. Those people who voted actually voted for a constituency MP. That’s how the voting system works in the UK. Kier Starmer, like every party leader got into his position in accordance with the constitution of the party. In Kier Starmers case that means he was decided by Labour Party members, affiliated supporters (like members of trade unions affiliated with Labour), and registered supporters who paid a fee to participate. Starmer won with 56.2% of the vote in this internal election.
    1
  24. @ maybe but unlikely. In fact by far the most likely outcome would have been a hung parliament which is fairly typical of purely PR type voting systems. It is a matter of opinion if you think thats good or bad but for the record, a proportional vote based on the latest general election result would have resulted in the following seat distribution~: Labour 219 seats, Conservatives 154, Liberal Democrats 79, Reform 93. Of course a PR system may well have resulted in further variances if, for example, it impacted the tactical vote or encouraged more people to turnout. Nevertheless a large part of the labour result was because of a big proportion of Conservatives voters not voting at all (50% of the reduction of Conservatives votes compared to 5% loss to Reform). Regardless, the net result would have been pretty much the same in practice - Viz., a hung parliament, with no overall control by any one party. this is pretty much typical of PR systems and is the common result in countries that have it. The largest party would have to negotiate with other smaller parties to form a government leading to a tendency to merge in the middle. It’s a matter of opinion if you think thats more or less democratic.
    1
  25. Not that argument. Brexit failed big time, in every way. Get over it. Unless of course you are one of Putin’s lot. In which case it was your biggest triumph.
    1
  26. It was in session when it progressed through parliament: 1. Initial Proposal: The changes were first proposed in July 2024 as part of the Labour government’s broader fiscal policy aimed at addressing a significant budget deficit. The proposal was included in the budget announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves. 2. Debate and Voting: The proposal was debated in both Houses of Parliament. Despite significant opposition from various political groups and charities, the Labour government, with its strong majority, was able to pass the necessary legislation through the House of Commons. 3. Final Approval and Royal Assent: Following its passage in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the bill received Royal Assent in early September, with the law officially taking effect on September 16, 2024.
    1
  27. Exactly which law has he changed?
    1
  28.  @williammkydde  except it isn’t is it. Not in the U.K. anyway. Which law has been changed?
    1
  29.  @williammkydde  you are simply incorrect. In the UK, the executive comprises the Crown and the Government, including the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers. The legislature; Parliament, comprises the Crown, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Give me just one example where someone has been arrested simply for a thought or Facebook comment that did not, in their post, contravene the long standing limitations of freedom of speech? You obviously have loads of examples, just give me one. I am really curious. Thanks.
    1
  30.  @karlpedersen7  No geography lessons today. I am just pointing out the facts and challenging nonsense or misleading information from wherever it comes. Very very happy to have concrete verifiable examples of anything you like that will support any point you make and I will add it to my fact checking database.
    1
  31.  @williammkydde  your comments are again very misleading sorry to say. Here are the real facts: Judges are not political appointments - this isn’t the USA. In the United Kingdom, judges are appointed by the Monarch (the King or Queen) on the advice of the Prime Minister or the Lord Chancellor, depending on the level of the judiciary. However, the process is largely overseen by an independent body called the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), which was established to ensure the selection of judges is based on merit rather than political influence. The JAC is responsible for selecting candidates for judicial office, who are then recommended to the Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor may accept or reject the recommendations, but the process is designed to minimize political interference. For senior positions such as Justices of the Supreme Court, a separate selection commission is convened to make recommendations to the Lord Chancellor, who then forwards the names to the Prime Minister, who in turn advises the Monarch to make the appointment. Concerning police superintendent I assume you meant Chief Constable. The PM does not appoint the Chief Constable. In the United Kingdom, the appointment of a Chief Constable is made by the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) of the respective police force area. Here’s how the process works: 1. Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC): The PCC is an elected official responsible for ensuring that the police force effectively carries out its duties. The PCC is responsible for appointing the Chief Constable. 2. Selection Process: The selection process for a Chief Constable typically involves a competitive recruitment process, which may include interviews, assessments, and sometimes public involvement or consultation. The PCC oversees this process. 3. Confirmation: After the PCC selects a candidate, the appointment must be confirmed by a Police and Crime Panel, which is a body made up of local council members and independent members. The panel has the power to veto the PCC’s choice, but this power is rarely used. 4. Final Appointment: Once the selection is approved by the Police and Crime Panel, the PCC formally appoints the Chief Constable. For London the process is slightly different: In London, the process for appointing the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police (the equivalent of a Chief Constable in other areas) is slightly different from that in other parts of the UK. The appointment process involves the following steps: 1. Home Secretary: The Home Secretary (a senior government minister in charge of the Home Office) is primarily responsible for the appointment of the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. 2. Mayor of London: The Mayor of London also plays a significant role in the appointment process. The Mayor, through the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), works in consultation with the Home Secretary to identify and interview candidates. 3. Selection Process: A competitive selection process is conducted, often involving interviews and assessments. The selection panel typically includes representatives from the Home Office, MOPAC, and other senior officials. 4. Approval: The Home Secretary makes the final decision on the appointment, taking into account the views of the Mayor of London. 5. Formal Appointment: Once a candidate is chosen, the Home Secretary formally appoints the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police.
    1
  32. Since when can someone not hold a favourable view of someone in a party they don’t support? The two main parties have traditionally been quite broad churches. Why cant someone like a politician of another party or, for that matter, dislike a politician in their own? Unless of course you are suggesting that people should be totally tribal.
    1
  33.  @iancanty9875  thanks for the clarification. Which part of free speech are you saying Starmer has taken away?
    1
  34.  @iancanty9875  that’s exactly the problem. I cant find anything on line from a reputable and primary source so without evidence we have to conclude your comment is untrue. But if you really do have evidence then I genuinely would like to see it. If you stick to the community guidelines of UTube then you wont get blocked.
    1
  35.  @PLeon-kd1yd  well, whether train drivers are overpaid or not is a matter of your opinion for which you and I have a right to hold. However, lazy is a very misleading and unfair accusation simply based on the facts: Train drivers are not lazy. Their job requires a high level of responsibility and focus, as they are in charge of operating heavy machinery, ensuring passenger safety, and adhering to strict schedules. They often work long hours, deal with high stress due to safety concerns, and sometimes have to respond to emergencies. Like any profession, there may be individual differences, but train driving as a career demands considerable skill and dedication. Like any profession there will be a minority of lazy workers but you can be thankful that the next time you travel by train the overwhelming probability (based on statistical fact) is that you will have a dedicated, skilled, and professional train driver looking after your safety.
    1
  36. No.
    1
  37. So give me an example of when someone got arrested, convicted and sent to prison for running away
    1
  38. The claim that immigrants to the UK want to change its culture is often made, but the available evidence does not support the idea that this is a widespread or coordinated intention. On the contrary, research and data consistently shows the opposite, for example the British Future Survey (2022), found that a majority of immigrants express a strong desire to integrate into British society, including learning the language and adopting British values. The report highlights that most migrants view Britain positively and respect its traditions. Likewise the IPPR Report (2020), concluded that migrants generally assimilate into UK culture over time, especially in areas like employment, education, and community engagement. Immigrants, like all communities, retain aspects of their cultural heritage (e.g., food, language, religious practices), but this does not equate to an effort to “change” British culture. While some individuals may hold different values or preferences, the overall data suggests that most immigrants integrate into British society rather than seek to change it fundamentally. There is no substantial evidence of a coordinated effort to replace or undermine British culture—rather, cultural exchange and adaptation occur as they have throughout history. Probably best not to believe everything written in the Daily Mail.
    1
  39. And where would you deport them to?
    1
  40.  @EgoChip  who said we want criminals? The reasons why many genuine asylum seekers do not use legal routes is very well documented. The UK offers very few official legal routes for asylum seekers to apply for protection. For example, resettlement schemes or family reunification programs exist but are often limited in scale, have strict eligibility criteria, and do not cover all types of asylum seekers. As a result, many people cannot access these pathways. In addition the UK generally requires asylum seekers to be physically present in the country to apply for asylum. Unlike some other countries, the UK does not allow people to apply for asylum from abroad (with some exceptions, such as refugee resettlement). This means that many have no choice but to reach the UK by irregular means in order to seek asylum. There are other reasons too. Many asylum seekers flee countries with oppressive regimes, war zones, or failed states, where it may be impossible to obtain legal travel documents. Additionally, it is almost impossible for people fleeing persecution to obtain a UK visa for travel, as they may not meet the requirements of ordinary visa categories such as work, study, or tourism. Furthermore Asylum seekers often flee life-threatening situations, such as war or persecution, and may have to leave their homes suddenly without time to navigate complex legal systems. Their priority is to find safety quickly, even if it means taking irregular routes, rather than waiting for potentially unavailable legal processes. Many asylum seekers may not be aware of any legal routes available to them or may lack access to legal advice that could help them understand the options. Additionally, misinformation or exploitation by traffickers and smugglers can lead them to believe that there are no safe and legal ways to reach the UK. Finally, the UK is an island nation, which makes it more difficult for people to reach through regular travel means compared to countries accessible by land. This can force individuals to resort to irregular and dangerous routes to make it to the UK. For these reasons, many genuine asylum seekers are unable to use legal routes and end up risking their lives on dangerous journeys to reach safety in the UK.
    1
  41.  @chr102  I do as it happens. But go on…..do share why you think it is so? I genuinely would be interested.
    1
  42.  @guitarfool70  well I have tried and have so far been unable to found any case where someone has been arrested simply for pointing out in a Facebook post police running away. Since you say it’s easy then great, do please share the specific example. I would love to find it. Thanks. …..or is it by chance just made up fake news?
    1
  43. And where did you get the information that police handed out £10 notes? Im genuinely curious.
    1
  44.  @davidbarlow350  How about we stick to finding evidence first? Any talk of Taqiyya or sleeper cells at this stage is no less daft than suggesting that Donald Trump ordered this heinous act as a false flag operation. And we don’t need the richest man in the world wading in on it without, as usual, any evidence whatsoever and neither do we need a fake news and hate channel like British Stand contributing to misinformation. Since you mention it I am sure you realise fully well that Taqiyya is frequently misrepresented and politicised, particularly in discussions about extremism or integration. The concept of taqiyya is frequently misused in discussions about sleeper cells to suggest that Muslims in general might conceal extremist intentions. However, this is a misrepresentation and conflates a theological principle meant for survival with deliberate acts of terrorism.
    1
  45. @ more accurately it is what you want to believe. Just because you don’t want to believe in actual demonstrable fact based evidence doesn’t make it go away.
    1
  46. @ which ones? Please enlighten me
    1
  47. @ really? Well I’m grateful for your help. Since you have so many of these ‘facts’ try giving me just one . Shouldn’t be too difficult- and if it is real it won’t be taken down
    1
  48. @ oh come on. You are teasing me. I’m desperate to hear at least just one of your “facts”. Go on. Try it, I would love to research if it is actually true.
    1
  49. @ is that the best you can do? You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. And rudeness only supports the suspicion that you don’t have any. Otherwise give me a verifiable fact that I have missed. Just one.
    1
  50. Its called #Brexit
    1