Starmer is now threatening to ban X in the UK. There'll be fucking uproars if he does. He's trying to make out they are cracking down on sexually abusive images but no mention of the endless porn websites full of misogynistic, violent and paedophilic content. No ban on smart phones for kids. Not Snapchat ban which is often used by paedo creeps trying to groom kids
He wants to shut down the only outlet where people can openly criticise him.
Red Okktober said
Jan 10 11:13 AM, 2026
Starmer is trying to impose his blandness onto the nation by removing the recognised vices and sucking the fun out of being alive - he's turning us into a proper nanny state.
So far he's taxing pubs and nightclubs out of existence, put age verification on adult sites (easily navigated by any teenage boy), raised gambling taxes, wants to create a 'smoke-free generation', junk food ad ban, and increased sugar tax (dietry dictatorship).
While some of these may look good on paper, many people enjoy something that is 'naughty but nice', and it should be an individual choice if someone wants to drink, smoke, gamble, look at porn, drink sugary drinks, eat burgers etc. He is making it harder and harder for people to do those things, and now he wants to stop people using X.
Syl said
Jan 10 12:45 PM, 2026
I may be old fashioned, but I do believe the free and easy accessibility to porn is damaging to many people....especially the young.
I don't believe it should be banned, I think it should be controlled more. Parents can't do it as they once could, so the only other answer is to make it harder to access....maybe charging to view.
Red Okktober said
Jan 10 1:27 PM, 2026
Syl wrote:
I may be old fashioned, but I do believe the free and easy accessibility to porn is damaging to many people....especially the young. I don't believe it should be banned, I think it should be controlled more. Parents can't do it as they once could, so the only other answer is to make it harder to access....maybe charging to view.
All of the things I mentioned can be damaging to people, but it should be about personal choice and not dictated to us by the government, otherwise we start heading in the direction of China and N Korea.
Of course, people can get addicted to any vice, but there are far more who enjoy the 'naughty but nice' aspect of vices than there are addicts. So should those vices be removed to spare the addicts? I don't think so.
Personally I would rather have a level of addiction, but freedom of choice, than a bland sanitised society controlled by the government.
Porn isn't going away, there are too many people who watch it, and too many people making a living by appearing in it, for that to happen. It used to top shelf mags and dodgy pirated videos in my youth, but now it is way more accessible (to women as well as men, but obviously mainly men). I agree the wider accesibillty to it is an issue, but thats the internet for you, and I'm not sure that there is a viable answer to that at this time.
Syl said
Jan 10 7:08 PM, 2026
I bet millions more people watch porn now than say 50 years ago. No more going out skulking in seedy shops looking for explicit porn that wasn't on sale anywhere else, now, just a touch of a key and it's in your own living room.
I do think charging people would dampen some enthusiasm, especially for kids who can't process it like adults.
Maddog said
Jan 11 12:36 AM, 2026
Maddog wrote:
Not 100% sure this is true, but I do know that the Gulf States want no part of radical Islam except for their own version.
Pity our own governments don't do more to stop the radicalisation in some homes, schools, and Mosques.
Starmer doesn't want to stop it, it suits his agenda. He hates us, and wants their votes to be PM for years. This won't work.
It's not only Labour who don't do enough. Hate preaching and radicalisation, in schools, uni's Mosques, has been going on for years Mags.
Yes, and Conservative did nothing either.
When my girls were at school in the eighties, they had to visit a mosque. We could have refused, but all their friends were going, so we allowed it. No muslims, there wasn't many then, went to our churches or did assembly. Then to include them, hymns were stopped. Been going on a very long time, but only now coming to the fore.
The Chinese super embassy in London has been officially given the green light to proceed, in what is being called 'Starmer's biggest mistake yet' by opposition parties. It defies all logic why you would allow a country like China to build a massive embassy right next to London's financial district, even in the knowledge that plans show a 208 room 'secret basement'.
Starmer is planning a trip to China next week, where he intends to butter up the Chinese into making new trade deals, which he will no doubt be shouting from the rooftops about as being one of his 'flagship' deals. The trip was unlikely to have gone ahead without agreeing to the embassy being built. In effect, Starmer has exchanged national security for trade deals with China.
Here's what opposing politicans, including some Labour backbenchers, have said:
"Disastrous"
"This government should be ashamed of its decision to allow the super spy embassy to go ahead today."
"This is a disgraceful act of cowardice from a Labour Government and prime minister utterly devoid of backbone."
"The first duty of any government is to keep the country safe. But Keir Starmer has relegated that most critical priority beneath his desperate desire for Beijing's approval."
"Labour's latest sell-out confirms they cannot be trusted to stand up for Britain on the international stage."
Dame Priti Patel accused Stamer of having "sold off our national security to the Chinese Communist Party with his shameful super embassy surrender".
Labour "don't have a backbone to stand up" to the Chinese."
"Every security briefing I have had identifies China as a hostile state to the UK. I am in no doubt that this mega-embassy should not be allowed to go ahead."
Magica said
Jan 20 12:49 PM, 2026
Red Okktober wrote:
The Chinese super embassy in London has been officially given the green light to proceed, in what is being called 'Starmer's biggest mistake yet' by opposition parties. It defies all logic why you would allow a country like China to build a massive embassy right next to London's financial district, even in the knowledge that plans show a 208 room 'secret basement'.
Starmer is planning a trip to China next week, where he intends to butter up the Chinese into making new trade deals, which he will no doubt be shouting from the rooftops about as being one of his 'flagship' deals. The trip was unlikely to have gone ahead without agreeing to the embassy being built. In effect, Starmer has exchanged national security for trade deals with China.
Here's what opposing politicans, including some Labour backbenchers, have said:
"Disastrous"
"This government should be ashamed of its decision to allow the super spy embassy to go ahead today."
"This is a disgraceful act of cowardice from a Labour Government and prime minister utterly devoid of backbone."
"The first duty of any government is to keep the country safe. But Keir Starmer has relegated that most critical priority beneath his desperate desire for Beijing's approval."
"Labour's latest sell-out confirms they cannot be trusted to stand up for Britain on the international stage."
Dame Priti Patel accused Stamer of having "sold off our national security to the Chinese Communist Party with his shameful super embassy surrender".
Labour "don't have a backbone to stand up" to the Chinese."
"Every security briefing I have had identifies China as a hostile state to the UK. I am in no doubt that this mega-embassy should not be allowed to go ahead."
Starmer's a communist. This suits him down to the ground.
There was one in Blackheath years ago, now a nursing home and an elderly home. The walls are leaded so you can't use a phone in the rooms. It was there years.
Red Okktober said
Jan 20 1:04 PM, 2026
Magica wrote:
Starmer's a communist. This suits him down to the ground.
There was one in Blackheath years ago, now a nursing home and an elderly home. The walls are leaded so you can't use a phone in the rooms. It was there years.
He gets bullied by every foreign leader and tries to suck up to them to get in their good books. Macron played him like a fool, and he is Trump's personal gimp.
He's like the school wimp who everyone picks on - gets his pocket money stolen, has his chair pulled away before he sits down, a 'kick me' sticker on his back, made to eat worms and dance in puddles, has his trousers and pants pulled down in front of class.........
But he is now an adult, and is somehow in the position of representing Britain on the worlsd stage!
Syl said
Jan 20 4:26 PM, 2026
It was certainly cringeworthy the way he handed Trump the invite for a 2nd state visit....my toes still curl at the memory of that one.
Magica said
Jan 20 5:00 PM, 2026
Syl wrote:
It was certainly cringeworthy the way he handed Trump the invite for a 2nd state visit....my toes still curl at the memory of that one.
I know, it was soooooooo embarrassing. 😳
Anonymous said
Jan 23 10:52 AM, 2026
Syl said
Jan 23 1:04 PM, 2026
Anonymous wrote:
Sneaking illegal undocumented men in at the dead of night sums this government up.
Then, take amenities away where army cadets trained to house them...depriving what benefits the British citizens and give it to people who have no right to be here in the first place.
After the 540 men move in and crime rises, when parents are scared to let their kids out of their house and women are being hassled, abused and worse, not only there, but eventually in a town near you, I wonder how many will still be shouting racist?
Not 100% sure this is true, but I do know that the Gulf States want no part of radical Islam except for their own version.
Starmer is now threatening to ban X in the UK. There'll be fucking uproars if he does. He's trying to make out they are cracking down on sexually abusive images but no mention of the endless porn websites full of misogynistic, violent and paedophilic content. No ban on smart phones for kids. Not Snapchat ban which is often used by paedo creeps trying to groom kids
He wants to shut down the only outlet where people can openly criticise him.
So far he's taxing pubs and nightclubs out of existence, put age verification on adult sites (easily navigated by any teenage boy), raised gambling taxes, wants to create a 'smoke-free generation', junk food ad ban, and increased sugar tax (dietry dictatorship).
While some of these may look good on paper, many people enjoy something that is 'naughty but nice', and it should be an individual choice if someone wants to drink, smoke, gamble, look at porn, drink sugary drinks, eat burgers etc. He is making it harder and harder for people to do those things, and now he wants to stop people using X.
I don't believe it should be banned, I think it should be controlled more. Parents can't do it as they once could, so the only other answer is to make it harder to access....maybe charging to view.
All of the things I mentioned can be damaging to people, but it should be about personal choice and not dictated to us by the government, otherwise we start heading in the direction of China and N Korea.
Of course, people can get addicted to any vice, but there are far more who enjoy the 'naughty but nice' aspect of vices than there are addicts. So should those vices be removed to spare the addicts? I don't think so.
Personally I would rather have a level of addiction, but freedom of choice, than a bland sanitised society controlled by the government.
Porn isn't going away, there are too many people who watch it, and too many people making a living by appearing in it, for that to happen. It used to top shelf mags and dodgy pirated videos in my youth, but now it is way more accessible (to women as well as men, but obviously mainly men). I agree the wider accesibillty to it is an issue, but thats the internet for you, and I'm not sure that there is a viable answer to that at this time.
I do think charging people would dampen some enthusiasm, especially for kids who can't process it like adults.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/uae-limiting-students-coming-to-uk-over-muslim-brotherhood-concerns-zvpdd6fqn?fbclid=IwdGRzaAPPz6djbGNrA8_Pn2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHpPrCI8iGAWTfXqI7QrLb9WysHF5QZrztTUohKQDGkKGwA_eb2z6Ht1M5UX4_aem_8T7SoKVA3uvy0zZZZTO3nA
I can't read it, but I get the gist.
Pity our own governments don't do more to stop the radicalisation in some homes, schools, and Mosques.
Starmer doesn't want to stop it, it suits his agenda. He hates us, and wants their votes to be PM for years. This won't work.
It's not only Labour who don't do enough. Hate preaching and radicalisation, in schools, uni's Mosques, has been going on for years Mags.
Yes, and Conservative did nothing either.
When my girls were at school in the eighties, they had to visit a mosque. We could have refused, but all their friends were going, so we allowed it. No muslims, there wasn't many then, went to our churches or did assembly. Then to include them, hymns were stopped. Been going on a very long time, but only now coming to the fore.
Starmer is planning a trip to China next week, where he intends to butter up the Chinese into making new trade deals, which he will no doubt be shouting from the rooftops about as being one of his 'flagship' deals. The trip was unlikely to have gone ahead without agreeing to the embassy being built. In effect, Starmer has exchanged national security for trade deals with China.
Here's what opposing politicans, including some Labour backbenchers, have said:
"Disastrous"
"This government should be ashamed of its decision to allow the super spy embassy to go ahead today."
"This is a disgraceful act of cowardice from a Labour Government and prime minister utterly devoid of backbone."
"The first duty of any government is to keep the country safe. But Keir Starmer has relegated that most critical priority beneath his desperate desire for Beijing's approval."
"Labour's latest sell-out confirms they cannot be trusted to stand up for Britain on the international stage."
Dame Priti Patel accused Stamer of having "sold off our national security to the Chinese Communist Party with his shameful super embassy surrender".
Labour "don't have a backbone to stand up" to the Chinese."
"Every security briefing I have had identifies China as a hostile state to the UK. I am in no doubt that this mega-embassy should not be allowed to go ahead."
Starmer's a communist. This suits him down to the ground.
There was one in Blackheath years ago, now a nursing home and an elderly home. The walls are leaded so you can't use a phone in the rooms. It was there years.
He gets bullied by every foreign leader and tries to suck up to them to get in their good books. Macron played him like a fool, and he is Trump's personal gimp.
He's like the school wimp who everyone picks on - gets his pocket money stolen, has his chair pulled away before he sits down, a 'kick me' sticker on his back, made to eat worms and dance in puddles, has his trousers and pants pulled down in front of class.........
But he is now an adult, and is somehow in the position of representing Britain on the worlsd stage!
I know, it was soooooooo embarrassing. 😳
Sneaking illegal undocumented men in at the dead of night sums this government up.
Then, take amenities away where army cadets trained to house them...depriving what benefits the British citizens and give it to people who have no right to be here in the first place.
After the 540 men move in and crime rises, when parents are scared to let their kids out of their house and women are being hassled, abused and worse, not only there, but eventually in a town near you, I wonder how many will still be shouting racist?