Possible UK MALE Curfew after 18.00 hours ??

[boja]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sovhxatb7o0

Ban men from the streets after 6pm says Green Party Baroness! (4k)

The Sarah Everard case has understandably upset people. And it is especially concerning because the alleged perpetrator is a serving police officer.

And the concerns and fears women always have about going out after dark, have once again burst into the public consciousness.

With many women coming forward and talking about the fear they have of being alone in public both at night and during the day.

And I would guess that today will see a marked increase in profit for the purveyors of personal alarms, pepper sprays and the like.

And, as ever we will see massive knee-jerk over-reactions.

Step forward Baroness Jones of the Green Party.

Speaking from the red benches last night, she told her fellow peers:

"In the week that Sarah Everard was abducted and, we suppose killed, because remains have been found in a woodland in Kent, I argue that, at the next opportunity for any Bill that is appropriate, I might put in an amendment to create a curfew for men on the streets after 6 pm.

"I feel this would make women a lot safer, and discrimination of all kinds would be lessened."

Actually, this would increase discrimination by huge amounts - against men. But I'm not sure that either she or the Greens are much worried about that.

What she seems to be asking for, is to have men 'cancelled' after dark.

She may not realise this, but it would be a sort of chronological apartheid practiced against men.

And would this apply to all men in all professions and all trades? Emergency plumbers? Bus drivers? Taxi drivers? Doctors? Paramedics maybe?

And at what time would the curfew end? Midnight? 3 am? 5 am? 7 am? Or never?

And it would probably kill off the night-time hospitality trade completely.

But these days men can claim to be women, so how could they be stopped from wandering out?

But all that aside, the baroness is tarring all men with the same brush. As far as her statement goes, she's basically claiming that all men, every single one of them, are a serious danger to women.

Do men have the right to be offended at that? Not in the 21st Century it seems.

No, nowadays men are required to do a Harry, and just sit quiet and agree with everything she says.

So, what do you think about Baroness Jones? Please share, and comment below.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSJMlKxhXX8

The Welsh First Minister, Mark Drakeford, has refused to rule out using a curfew on men to help make women feel safer.

This comes hot on the heels of the Green Party peer, Baroness Jones, saying in response to the murder of Sarah Everard that she would put an amendment into the next appropriate bill to force a curfew on all men to keep them off the streets after 6pm.

So it's no wonder that Drakeford has jumped on the bandwagon, is it?

When asked about this when talking to the BBC, he said:

"If there were a crisis, and you needed to take dramatic action that allowed that crisis to be drawn down, then of course you'd be prepared to consider all measures that would make a difference.

"People need to be safe and to feel safe. And that's absolutely the sort of society we wish to create here in Wales."

But he did say that a curfew could only be a temporary answer and was therefore not at the top of his list.

And added that there are other things that could be done.

He should have ruled it out altogether as a stupid suggestion.

So, what's the next suggestion? Men and women can go out on alternate nights, maybe?

Are we seeing a new sort of segregation being pushed here - keeping men and women apart as much as possible?

I know, I'm overreacting.

But the next time a serial killer is on the loose, instead of telling women to stay indoors maybe we'll see an emergency order to keep men off the streets?

Anyway, I'm guessing that Drakeford was hoping to gain some of the female vote for himself and the Labour party in the May Senedd elections. But he may well have lost a lot of the male vote over this as well.

By talking about a curfew that could keep all men, including the perfectly safe 99.99 per cent, out of the pubs, just as lockdown might be starting to ease in the run up to summer.

WHAT CAN I SAY ??

[Tintin]

This is of course absolute bonkers and there will be an enormous amount of pushback from women - not just men. Somebody remarked on Twitter earlier (a woman) that this is one of those seeded/planted ideas as a part of a thought experiment, just to gauge response I would wager.

[Mecklenburger]

The police officer arrested on suspicion of kidnap and murder had a female accomplice who was also arrested, according to the Metropolitan Police spokesman on You Tube last night (11 March).

It may have been the female who made the victim feel "comfortable". So NOBODY must be out after six at night. The fact of the matter is, so long as we continue to have motor traffic on our roads, women and female children are always at risk no matter what the hour of day.

[Mike]

I agree with Ant. It's a feeler type thing maybe.

And what I think they do sometimes is: decide they want to implement something draconian, offer something even worse than what they want..knowing they'll get serious pushback, and then "settle" for what they originally wanted by appearing to compromise. David Icke has a name for that. Totalitarian tiptoe I think it is.

What would just be great tho if the thing was passed is if large swaths of men simply "identified" as women as a reaction:bigsmile:

[The Moss Trooper]

Yep,

Bonkers is the right word, I also agree that this is some sort of thought experiment/Totalitarian tip-toe shenanigans.

I've been "identifying" as a vaccinated person recently...... So far, no problems.

[Mike]

Yep,

Bonkers is the right word, I also agree that this is some sort of thought experiment/Totalitarian tip-toe shenanigans.

I've been "identifying" as a vaccinated person recently...... So far, no problems.



Clever. But I have an even better idea - just identify as someone who is immune to virus' altogether:)

Anyone who disagrees will be regarded as an oppressor and thrown in jail for violating hate speech laws. Problem solved.

[Matthew]

Well, its a childish thing for her to say. And distracting. It was a Metropolitan PC with a background working with diplomats and VIPs in the capital. So how myopic do we go? A curfew for all Met Officers? A curfew for all male Met Officers? Perhaps the Metropolitan Police could recruit better? But he had an impressive background doing government level work. What were they meant to do? Strange how distracted we are from some of the awkward truths

[janette]

Is it April 1st today ??

[Mecklenburger]

The various police reports on YouTube this evening state that Police Constable Wayne Couzens of the Diplomatic Protection Squad has been charged with kidnap and murder. At Wandsworth police station on the evening of his arrest he sustained a head injury in his cell for which he was treated. He will appear on Saturday 13 March at Westminster Magistrates Court for a routine preliminary hearing.

After crossing Clapham Common towards 2130 hrs on the night in question Sarah Everard was seen by a traffic camera to make a cellphone call in Poynders Road, the last time she was seen alive. Police subsequently concentrated their search in flats at Poynders Court after which they went to a house in Kent. Their enquiries led to the discovery of a body in woods at Ashford.

[Mare]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

[Sérénité]

If this genuinely was the context of her speech, then there’s a lot more to be feared about women like Baroness Jones being allowed to step foot in Parliament than there is of men in general.

It currently feels like the media is playing everyone off against everyone else...it’s like a massive game of divide and conquer.

There is anti-lock down protests planned for every major city around the world on the 20th March. Could this be a way to cause anger towards the police and untrust between male and female protestors?
No idea why this came to mind. But they always have an agenda for using unfortunate events to their gain for something...

[Patient]

Yep,

Bonkers is the right word, I also agree that this is some sort of thought experiment/Totalitarian tip-toe shenanigans.

I've been "identifying" as a vaccinated person recently...... So far, no problems.



Clever. But I have an even better idea - just identify as someone who is immune to virus' altogether:)

Anyone who disagrees will be regarded as an oppressor and thrown in jail for violating hate speech laws. Problem solved.

Didn't the WHO redefine immunity to mean "a person that has had the vaccine"?

Well, you have right to identify as any one of the dozen or so new genders out there, and you have the right to change your mind. So, just go with what is necessary. :)

[safara]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

Is the correct answer.

Whenever there is dangerous man about, Police tell women to stay at home to keep safe. A curfew for women.

This lady is simply flipping that and giving people pause for thought saying that it should be men that stay at home to keep women safe.

The backlash on this suggestion by people shows just how misogynistic society is.

[Mike]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

Is the correct answer.

Whenever there is dangerous man about, Police tell women to stay at home to keep safe. A curfew for women.

This lady is simply flipping that and giving people pause for thought saying that it should be men that stay at home to keep women safe.

The backlash on this suggestion by people shows just how misogynistic society is.



That's preposterous.

Do you think a night prowling man who was brazen enough to murder would be swayed by a 6pm curfew for men? Do you imagine that would stop him? Be reasonable. Asking women to observe a curfew under these circumstances instead of men isn't some form of patriarchal favoritism, or misogyny. It's just the lesser of the evils, because it makes much more sense.

[safara]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

Is the correct answer.

Whenever there is dangerous man about, Police tell women to stay at home to keep safe. A curfew for women.

This lady is simply flipping that and giving people pause for thought saying that it should be men that stay at home to keep women safe.

The backlash on this suggestion by people shows just how misogynistic society is.



That's preposterous.

Do you think a night prowling man who was brazen enough to murder would be swayed by a 6pm curfew for men? Do you imagine that would stop him? Be reasonable. Asking women to observe a curfew under these circumstances instead of men isn't some form of patriarchal favoritism, or misogyny. It's just the lesser of the evils, because it makes much more sense.

Indeed - but makes you think about it and how vulnerable women still are. Which was the point of her comments.

[Tintin]

Really what we are seeing here is an already tired and drained UK population, that has been subject to a relentless psychological assault at the hands of the British state being played - again - by the promulgating by the 'old' media of yet more dangerous nonsense, this time using another 'authority' figure's comments (the Baroness in this instance) continuing the narrative, the divide-and-conquer strand, and further weaponising this. It may just be a 'moment'; it may be a seed-sowing exercise, to create a debate (sic) - we'll see.

I rather think this will blow over and be called out for the ludicrous bunk that it actually is, or, is my hope at least.

Right on cue it would seem, in tandem with my earlier comments about pushback, here we have two very well respected (okay, perhaps one) female public figures conducting a brief civil exchange on Twitter (Sue Cook is a brilliant old school journalist - Davina McCall a TV presenter):

1370433660994924547

Anyone is welcome to contact them directly and accuse them of *misogyny; they'll be no doubt glad to hear from you :)

*I'll have to check again but I'm fairly certain there's a debate taking place in the UK House of Lords (?) concerning amendments to a Bill around domestic issues incorporating these 'issues', such as they are, sometime this week.

[Mecklenburger]

The latest information about the case itself is that Wayne Couzens aged 48 appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court Saturday 13 March. He appeared in the dock with a female but the cirumstances surrounding this person were not reported. His application for bail was not granted and he was remanded in custody to appear at the Central Criminal Court on 16 March.

Other details that have emerged are that on 28 February he reportedly exposed himself sexually at a London fast-food location to a separate unnamed victim. The two head wounds he has sustained both occurred when he was alone in his cell. It is not known if they were self-inflicted.

There is a strip of grassed land alongside Couzens' house at Deal, Kent and this was in the process of being dug up by police on 12 March.

[Mecklenburger]

Further information on the crime itself; The body was found in Great Chart forest, Ashford, Kent in a bag used by builders to transport heavy loads. On Thursday 11 March a woman in her 30's was arrested on suspicion of being an accessory after the fact, appeared in court with the accused and was bailed to a date in mid-April. This woman lives at the same address in Deal as the accused.

[DeDukshyn]

What? Curfew for men to help "make women feel safer"?

That's absurd ... how about instead, we just force women to dress fully covered from head to toe in a flowing gown to hide their shape and cover their hair everything except their eyes so that they won't be luring men into raping them with their promiscuous physical presentations. [/s]

I feel I need to add an explainer here ...
My point is made in the irony -- by lumping all women into a category of being physically promiscuous and luring, causing the problem and thus presenting the solution to that generalized lumping, is akin to lumping and generalizing all men as attacking rapists, causing the problem, and thus presenting a solution to that generalized lumping. Both are equally absurd notions.

[Mike]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

Is the correct answer.

Whenever there is dangerous man about, Police tell women to stay at home to keep safe. A curfew for women.

This lady is simply flipping that and giving people pause for thought saying that it should be men that stay at home to keep women safe.

The backlash on this suggestion by people shows just how misogynistic society is.



That's preposterous.

Do you think a night prowling man who was brazen enough to murder would be swayed by a 6pm curfew for men? Do you imagine that would stop him? Be reasonable. Asking women to observe a curfew under these circumstances instead of men isn't some form of patriarchal favoritism, or misogyny. It's just the lesser of the evils, because it makes much more sense.

Indeed - but makes you think about it and how vulnerable women still are. Which was the point of her comments.


Well, look..one moment we're talking about how women are vulnerable and need protection, and the next we're talking about how strong and capable they are. Both are true in a sense, but I feel like these descriptions change with the wind when it's politically advantageous. And I find it aggravating.

But I was singling out your accusation of misogyny, which doesn't make the slightest bit of sense in this context.

[Constance]

ddddddddddddddddddddddddd

[jaybee]

There's been a development....

The vigil for Sarah Everard was cancelled but everyone turned up anyway - and police manhandled and arrested some women - shortly after Kate - Duchess of Cambridge (and future Queen) had been to pay her respects at the bandstand -

I expect the police just waded in - like they do at all public gatherings that don't follow the Lockdown crap -

bVOt9IbScqM

[happyuk]

Statistically men aged 16 years and over are most likely to be killed in the UK. (I want to stress that I'm not belittling female victims of crime here, each is a tragedy)

To add some perspective, some information from the Office for National Statistics (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020#:~:text=The%20homicide%20rate%20was%2011.7,a%2016%25%20decrease%20in%20the).


The homicide rate was 11.7 per million population, with the rate for males (17 per million population) almost three times that for females (6 per million population); this is a higher difference than previous years because of a 20% increase in the number of male victims, from 422 to 506, and a 16% decrease in the number of female victims, from 225 to 188.

How much do you really know about crime? (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/howmuchdoyoureallyknowaboutcrime/2018-11-06)

[Hermoor]

The reported age of Sarah Everard has me concerned.

Lots of things have me concerned.

We all collectively reap what we sow. There's nothing new under the sun.

Strange times. Nothing is ever as it seems. The smart money has known this forever.

Do you really know your enemy? Why do we even NEED enemies anyway? Says who?

I'm thinking of Ali refusing the draft and doing prison time instead.

I'm thinking of Madiba sacrificing so much more than even Ali.

We win in the end. It is already known. That's why the last gasp current mega-freakout is trying to freak everyone out as much as possible.

It is futile. Yet they all still go through the motions. They have no other choice.

We do have a choice.

Just say no.

[Bluegreen]

A 6pm Curfew For Men!

It started as a crude joke, but now it's an actual debate.

0bjB_Ffa8QM

[wegge]

My martial arts teacher wants his daughter to learn Brazilian jiu-jitsu as soon as possible, it’s purportedly the most effective self defense method.

If all the frightened people* would use their fear and outrage energy and channel it into something like this they would regain agency, more sense of control, more physical capabilities, more situational awareness, sense of achievement and so on.

But I guess calling out to imprison 50% of the population and marching for the subconscious agenda feels also pretty outstanding.

[Mecklenburger]

It is as well to remember that in Britain it is illegal to have a weapon even for defence on your person in a public place. Pepper spray is a weapon, for example. You might get away with it in court arguing that it is for protection against dangerous dogs but that is definitely no better than 50/50 for acquittal.

How the prosecution of the alleged perpetrator is going to be handled is interesting. He was charged on Thursday and makes his first appearance at the Old Bailey on Tuesday. That has got to be some kind of record. What the police and justice system want is for this case to go away as soon as possible. The British judiciary do not make deals but I think that in this case an exception might be made in exchange for a guilty plea and not all details released. A chance of release in the perpetrator's late seventies, Parkhurst maximum security prison on the Isle of Wight for some kind of personal security meanwhile.

[safara]

I do believe the original comment from the Baroness was a backlash against the Met suggesting there should be a 6pm curfew for women? I’ll have to dig that out and get back to you.

Is the correct answer.

Whenever there is dangerous man about, Police tell women to stay at home to keep safe. A curfew for women.

This lady is simply flipping that and giving people pause for thought saying that it should be men that stay at home to keep women safe.

The backlash on this suggestion by people shows just how misogynistic society is.



That's preposterous.

Do you think a night prowling man who was brazen enough to murder would be swayed by a 6pm curfew for men? Do you imagine that would stop him? Be reasonable. Asking women to observe a curfew under these circumstances instead of men isn't some form of patriarchal favoritism, or misogyny. It's just the lesser of the evils, because it makes much more sense.

Indeed - but makes you think about it and how vulnerable women still are. Which was the point of her comments.


But I was singling out your accusation of misogyny, which doesn't make the slightest bit of sense in this context.

Wow .

[Mike]

Hi Safara, it's my strong opinion, when I look around the world, that unfounded accusations of racism, transphobia, and misogyny are responsible for keeping us in this crazy space of polarization and tension and uber sensitivity. At the moment, here in the states anyway, that type of thing appears to be even more dangerous than the actual racism and misogyny and transphobia that actually exists. It's something that really troubles me, and that's why I reacted so strongly to your words. I don't identify that (the curfew) as misogyny personally, but hey that's just my take. You clearly feel different. And fair enough.

But it appears we're from 2 very different places, Zimbabwe and the US, and that likely accounts for some of the disconnect here. I imagine I might feel quite different having had your experiences. No hard feelings :handshake:

[DeDukshyn]

Hi Safara, it's my strong opinion, when I look around the world, that unfounded accusations of racism, transphobia, and misogyny are responsible for keeping us in this crazy space of polarization and tension and uber sensitivity. At the moment, here in the states anyway, that type of thing appears to be even more dangerous than the actual racism and misogyny and transphobia that actually exists. It's something that really troubles me, and that's why I reacted so strongly to your words. I don't identify that (the curfew) as misogyny personally, but hey that's just my take. You clearly feel different. And fair enough.

But it appears we're from 2 very different places, Zimbabwe and the US, and that likely accounts for some of the disconnect here. I imagine I might feel quite different having had your experiences. No hard feelings :handshake:

I get both your's and Safara's perspective. I think there's a bit of misunderstanding.

I don't think Safara was claiming that the the curfew is misogynistic (but I can be corrected), just that the reaction to the idea of giving women a 6pm curfew to keep them safe seems to have garnered far less pushback than the same curfew proposed on men, which may indicate that we except controlling woman's movements more than we except controlling men's movements, potentially revealing a hidden inequality. I think that was the point there.

But I also agree with your point, that one of those is likely to be more effective than the other, if this is deemed a way to solve the problem, and why would we choose a less effective solution? Just to be "politically correct"? Would the curfew not be to protect women or would it be to virtue signal and be a political statement, that in actuality would keep women less safe. Is the level of their safety a suitable pawn to be politically correct?

Both points of view are valid at the same time.

But the solution of a curfew - regardless of the sex it is imposed upon could not be more ridiculous, offensive and damaging to our culture. The fact that people are arguing about who's curfew it should be is a betrayal of the fact we should not even be entertaining this notion at all.

Arguing about who's sex is better suited to use in such a curfew, automatically begins to invisibly normalize the idea that a curfew of some sort is acceptable. This whole thing could be a psyop in itself ...

[Sérénité]

There seems to be a lot of chatter in certain Telegram groups I’m in (some was present at the vigil yesterday) who feel this incident is now being used as a Psy Op?

Much as last years police killing in the USA did.

I must admit it certainly is starting to look that way. It is all starting to seem very ‘off’ 🧐

[Brigantia]

There seems to be a lot of chatter in certain Telegram groups I’m in (some was present at the vigil yesterday) who feel this incident is now being used as a Psy Op?

Much as last years police killing in the USA did.

I must admit it certainly is starting to look that way. It is all starting to seem very ‘off’ 🧐

I've heard that too - my other half is on a Scottish-based football forum (they chat about a lot of other stuff besides football) and that's what they are speculating.

[Sérénité]

Interesting video here.
Facts;
On average 250 women a year are murdered in the U.K.
A royal member attending a vigil in the victims memory?
A vigil set up so quickly...within 48 hours of the victim being found and identified.
Set up by two active government employees
And funded by entities of companies striving for a new way of life, with a donation page set up instantly.
With a member of Parliament requesting a curfew for all men after 6pm.
The red headed girl who was arrested is an actress. Who after being arrested by the police has now requested a further vigil, but not aimed at the police to take place on the 15th March.

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/fake-news-psy-op-hugo-talks-lockdown_ATqshFNOpkM4ern.html

[Tintin]

Short of being able to ask Sarah directly perhaps the best view is from a close confidant - one who knew her very well; it helps to throw some perspective on this :flower:

My own view on what would have really been behind certain attendees at her 'vigil' would perhaps be demonstrated by the kind of organisational acumen that lies behind Soros' Open Society Foundation and its various offshoots. More on that later.

In the meantime.....



"The suggestion by a Green Party peer, that all men should be under curfew after dark to help women feel safer on the streets, is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. I would have laughed at it if it wasn’t such an utterly awful situation. Sarah was a humble, private and sensible person (among many other things!), and I feel certain she would not agree with the circumstances of her disappearance being used to promote these kinds of ideas." - Helena Edwards (friend of the deceased Sarah Everard)

------------------------

This is not what Sarah would have wanted
I think my friend would have been unsettled at how her death has been politicised

Helena Edwards, March 13th 2021 for Spiked (https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/13/this-is-not-what-sarah-would-have-wanted/)

https://media.spiked-online.com/website/images/2021/03/13171826/sarah-vigil-1536x864.jpg

Since we learned of Sarah’s disappearance, this experience has been hard to put into words. It’s not something anyone would ever imagine having to deal with. But now, as brutal as the outcome is, we have some answers. It’s shocking and devastating. But I would rather know than never find out what happened to her, so we can begin the long, painful grieving process.

When I first heard of the vigil for Sarah on Clapham Common I was looking forward to attending – it felt good to be able to ‘do something’ and express my love for Sarah and my sorrow for what has happened to her. Less than a day later, I decided not to attend, as have many of her friends. I can’t speak for all of them, but my reason for not attending is this: my friend’s tragic death has been hijacked. It is not a tribute to her any more, it’s about something else – and I don’t like what it has become.

Sarah was a victim of one of the most horrific crimes imaginable. She was extremely unlucky – that is all there is to it.

Her abduction and murder is not, in my opinion, a symptom of a sexist, dangerous society. When something awful like this happens there is a rush to look for reasons and apportion blame. If the suspect police officer in custody is eventually tried and found guilty of her murder, then I will hold him alone responsible. I will not be blaming ‘men’ or ‘the police’ for the actions of one individual. There will always be the odd psychopath out there – male or female – and there can be no accounting for that fact.

Sarah had many wonderful men in her life. Several of them were absolutely instrumental in the hunt for her, raising awareness online and in the local area, and out physically searching for her at the beginning. They are just as horrified as everyone else by what has happened.

I don’t think Sarah would have wanted them, or men in general, to be smeared with the same brush as her attacker. Most people, and indeed men, are good. They would never wish harm on anyone else, let alone attack or kill someone. Despite what has happened to Sarah allegedly at the hands of this man, I will continue to believe that.

The suggestion by a Green Party peer (https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/12/no-we-dont-need-a-curfew-for-men/), that all men should be under curfew after dark to help women feel safer on the streets, is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

I would have laughed at it if it wasn’t such an utterly awful situation. Sarah was a humble, private and sensible person (among many other things!), and I feel certain she would not agree with the circumstances of her disappearance being used to promote these kinds of ideas.

I also wish to publicly praise the police conducting this investigation. They have done their job brilliantly, and although sadly it is too late for Sarah, I am grateful they are finding us some of the answers that we so desperately need. I am sure they are equally stunned and appalled that this awful crime seems to have been perpetrated by one of their own.

As for us, her friends? Let us grieve for our loved one, brutally taken in such an awful way. The public reaction to her death has been overwhelming, and for the most part very touching. But be assured, the misuse of it by those with an ‘agenda’ is not a comfort to us.

As a 33-year-old woman, what will I take from this? I am reminded that life is short, and I will try to live mine to the full. Of course, I will be sensible and maybe take a few more taxis than I used to. But I will not live in fear. As soon as lockdown is over, I am going to go out, celebrate, get drunk with my mates in a pub. I will dance, laugh, cry, hug people and be grateful that I am alive. I will miss my friend deeply. I am so sad she will never see the end of lockdown and, as her friends, we will never get to enjoy these experiences with her again.

[Journeyman]

Interesting video here.
Facts;
On average 250 women a year are murdered in the U.K.
A royal member attending a vigil in the victims memory?
A vigil set up so quickly...within 48 hours of the victim being found and identified.
Set up by two active government employees
And funded by entities of companies striving for a new way of life, with a donation page set up instantly.
With a member of Parliament requesting a curfew for all men after 6pm.
The red headed girl who was arrested is an actress. Who after being arrested by the police has now requested a further vigil, but not aimed at the police to take place on the 15th March.

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/fake-news-psy-op-hugo-talks-lockdown_ATqshFNOpkM4ern.html


There seems to be a lot of chatter in certain Telegram groups I’m in (some was present at the vigil yesterday) who feel this incident is now being used as a Psy Op?

Much as last years police killing in the USA did.

I must admit it certainly is starting to look that way. It is all starting to seem very ‘off’ 🧐

This is my reading of this as well.

I should say at the start that, despite my doubts, until proven otherwise I will assume that the case itself was genuine, because it would compound the agony for those suffering the loss to read people doubting it even happened.

However, the reaction to this is giving off very similar vibes to the George Floyd incident. The massive levels of reporting, the high profile interventions, now the pivot to the police response to the demonstrations.

It feels contrived and fake as so much does these days and I'm deeply suspicious of it. :(

[Brigantia]

This photo is taking centre stage in the UK, of a student called Patsy Stevenson who"had never been so scared" as when police wrestled her to the ground. The story can be found on the BBC website (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56401127/page/2).

There are a lot of murmurs about her, as she is not only a student but also a part time model and actress. It's being said that she always ensures that someone is with her with a phone to film her.

Edit - apologies, I forgot to add the context; it was taken at the candlelit vigil for Sarah Everard. The more I look at the facial expression in this photo, the more I think it's staged; she looks like a soprano singing an aria rather than someone in pain and distress.

[Mecklenburger]

What does United Kingdom law say about this preposterous Green Party suggestion?

"In the UK, on the advice of the Privy Council or a Minister of the Crown in exceptional circumstances, the Crown may introduce emergency regulations under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 in case of an emergency threatening serious damage to human welfare (this appears to be the only sub-section which might apply to the Sarah Everard case). The duration of the regulation is limited to thirty days but may be extended by Parliament".

No matter how tragic the incident in which one person was murdered, it does not have the character of "an emergency" in the sense that thirty million members of the population must be forcibly kept off the streets from six in the evening until "it gets light". And why is it any safer on the streets between dawn and when it gets dark?

Forget what happens in "judicial systems" abroad. The circumstances of this kidnap, murder and heaven knows what else were verified by the Crown Prosecution Service. It would need to see evidence of a body, nature of the offence(s) committed and the evidence against the accused.
In this case once the CPS was satisfied, instructions were given to the police at Wandsworth police station to charge the alleged offenders. These two persons then appeared at the earliest possible time before the Chief Magistrate at Westminster for minor matters to be dealt with, (confirm identities, hear indictment etc). The principal accused will next appear at the Central Criminal Court on 16 March, which we await with interest.

[Icare]

My initial reaction: checking the date as in 'Is it already April 1st'.

My second reaction: This is a circus show. Totalitarian tiptoe indeed (someone above mentioned that as well somewhere).
They will let this play out to gauge how far they can actually push the public.

It reminds me of how they tried to further their agenda in a different subject years ago. Several decades ago some members of the Green Party in Germany tried to further the paedophile agenda by claiming sex was as natural for kids as for adults and if they consent to having sex with an adult, it's perfectly okay. Well, the 'zeitgeist' of that time (80/90?) hadn't quite "progressed" that far yet, so those members were shamed for it, yet nowadays we are all witness to the progressive sexualization of children and paedophilia is being brought into the mainstream more and more.

I see this attempt in the same light. They won't get anywhere with this right now, but they will learn from it in order to try and eventually have total control over when any of us are allowed to go out and even where we will be allowed to go. It won't happen overnight, but they will push their agenda as hard as they can by using 'safety reasons' and fear.

People need to wake up and see what's really behind this.

[Mecklenburger]

Wayne Couzens the accused in the Sarah Gerard case appeared in court at the Old Bailey today 16 March by video link. Also present by this method were family members of the victim. Couzens was remanded in custody until 9 July when his plea will be taken. A provisional date for trial has been set for 25 October and is expected to last four weeks in the case of a Not Guilty plea. The long trial is due to the huge amount of forensic evidence which has been amassed by police.

[Tintin]

One thing we can probably all agree upon is the very worse than distasteful hijacking of a young woman's tragic death for political exploitation, again. And we probably all do really know why this is happening.

Another much briefer statement from someone else who knew Sarah Everard :flower:

1369913443508183042

Admin musing: It might be time to give some thought to changing the title of the thread. It's beginning to not really reflect the important much broader issues being discussed, as would be naturally expected.

[Tintin]

https://web.archive.org/web/20210314013734/https://www.castingnow.co.uk/patsy-stevenson

[CurEus]

Ideintify as a cat and then are therefore nocturnal and MUST be allowed out at night.

I suppose men could wear niqjabs to please the Mysandrists.....

The pedumlum it seems is swinging too far.....the payback will probably look like Handmaid's Tale.