peak4

Regarding the Hartlepool Nasir Mosque, [Facebook link] I believe it escaped direct damage, as the police had prior intelligence, blocked the access and steered the demonstrators rioters away. The mosque by the way supplies food banks, works with a local church, supports the British Legion, and helped out during Covid. Community rallies around mosque after disorder BBC Said "patriots" did however raid a long standing British shop to steal goods to throw at the British police. GoFundMe launched for The Farm Shop in Hartlepool after protest damage Northern Echo The concerned families involved seem to have included an 11 year old, who's been arrested for torching the police car. Names of seven men charged with 'violent disorder' after Hartlepool riot Teeside Live

Given the footage of the locals turning out in Southport to rebuild the mosque's boundary wall, and the fire service helping to replace broken windows, I'd suggest that probably a yes. Amongst many other venues, there is a planned demo at the first UK mosque in Liverpool, I believe it's currently under restoration http://www.abdullahquilliam.org/ WHO WE ARE The Abdullah Quilliam Society We are a small dedicated team whose aim is to restore the First Mosque in England situated at Brougham Terrace, Liverpool. The Mosque was founded by a Victorian English convert to Islam: Abdullah Quilliam in 1887. Did you know that for almost one hundred years this building was used as Liverpool Records of marriages and Births. The staff who worked there used to refer to it as 'The Little Mosque' totally unaware that it was the first mosque in England and its historical value. It is our intention is to reveal the fascinating history behind the mosque, the man: Abdullah Quillam, his aims, ideals and continuing legacy. Yesterday I saw one of the calls for a meeting point there, under the banner of "Enough is Enough" An excellent Liverpudlian response here;

I do wonder how much of the above content it relevant to the thread title, which seems misleading to me anyway. "Collective Action" my not necessarily include an all out strike. A major potential issue is the prevention of GP practices employing more GPs as funding is only available for Physician Associates, with a similar issue for practice nurses. Leading doctors to launch legal action over physician associates Independent (not showing as behind a paywall at the moment, but alternatively try HERE) It comes amid rising concerns that doctors are being replaced with cheaper alternatives. Over 80% of locum GPs struggle to find work, finds BMA survey BMA A BMA survey has revealed that four out of five locum GPs in England (84%) cannot find work, despite patients waiting weeks for appointments. An overwhelming number of those who responded to the survey said they could not find suitable positions and because of that, more than 50% are expecting to make changes to their work or career plans in the next year.

Re the Darwin candidate, not sure if this might be the same chap https://www.merseyside.police.uk/news/merseyside/news/2024/july/fifth-arrest-following-disorder-in-southport/ We have arrested a fifth man in connection with the violent disorder in Southport on Tuesday night (30 July). Officers were called to a report of a domestic incident in Southport today (Wednesday 31 July) where it was reported a man had made threats to a male family member. Police attended and the suspect was taken to hospital for treatment for a head injury. Officers recognised the man from footage of the disorder in Southport on Tuesday, where he is alleged to have thrown rocks at officers and struck a police van, and where it is believed the head injury was sustained.

Spotted on Real Classic bike group on Facebook

I am not medically trained, I was an engineer before retirement. I have friends who have had mental health issues, ranging from mild depression to being admitted to mental health hospitals for treatment. I also have friends in social work who have been involved with having clients compulsorily admitted to hospitals. My own health record is no-one else's business but mine, though I have never been treated for, needed, or sought any sort of treatment for my own mental health.

Only as an end user. 🙂

Surely "Mental Health Issues" is a very generic term covering a whole range of symptoms from such as slight clinical depression through to psychosis and other, and as such isn't really that helpful when used in news debates. It gets used both an excuse by some, but also demonization of someone who is unable to relate to the world as the rest of us see it. Some folk with "mental health issues" do outwardly function more or less normally, and get on with earning a living, whilst very often having a very hard time of it; others are detained for their own safety, and that of others. Similarly "cardiac/respiratory issues", range from someone with mild AF who goes out running every week, to others with advanced heart failure, bedridden and unable to feed themselves.

To follow on from the above; bear in mind this is "The City of London", not The Met or Greater London City of London Police seize five illegal e-bikes and e-scooters a week CoL Police web site The City of London Police relaunched its cycling capability last summer to help combat phone snatching, as well as other offences like drug and road offences. The cycle response unit is highly visible, and able to quickly get through areas inaccessible to vehicles. The modified bikes have been illegally converted to have a motor greater than 250 watt and include a throttle that means the rider no longer needs to propel the pedals to trigger the power assistance. Legal e-bikes are not permitted to exceed 15.5mph and the motor will cut out if the maximum speed is hit. Illegal bikes have been clocked at doing nearly double the permitted limit. The modifications affectively turn the e-bikes into motorbikes and therefore in order to be road-legal require tax, insurance and a driving licence for the rider. Riders of these vehicles in the City, if caught, can expect to have them seized and depending on the offence, receive a fine of £300.

Not impressed with the article really, which seems to fail on several fronts. I really haven't the time to trawl through all the relevant legislation, but a very rough summary from what I remember; some of my exact terminology might not be up to speed with the legislation. It's all covered by existing legislation; E-Bikes isn't an ideal term to use in this sort of an article, as it fails to make the distinction between electrically assisted pedal cycles, and what are effectively fully electric motorcycles/mopeds. The former have strict power limits, and must only engage the motor assist when actually pedalling, and then only up to a defined maximum speed; as such they are still defined as bicycles in the road traffic act, and do not need mandatory insurance, registration, helmets etc. Many pedal cyclists do have voluntary insurance, either through groups like the CTC or their own home policies. Obviously we no longer have road tax in the strict sense, but excise duty is now charged on emissions so electric would be free anyway (at the moment), Electric bikes which can move under their own power are defined as mechanically propelled vehicles. As such they need to conform to all legislation, need MOTs where appropriate, insurance for road use, rider's licence, registration numbers, etc. There are some fully legal electric motorcycles and mopeds, the latter having strict power limits. Some need a full bike licence, others are OK on a provisional (I think). Remember the Hairy Bikers doing one series on fully electric bikes; those things are large and seriously fast, though obviously have limited range All of the above are prohibited from use on the pedestrian footway, other than shared spaces for bicycles. Anyone pulled on any powered vehicle without insurance may well end up with 6 points on their driving licence; I think if they don't have a licence, a ghost one is created and the points added there, which become active when a licence is obtained. They may well also be prosecuted for other offences under RTA, or Construction and Use legislation. E-Scooters are still electrically powered vehicles, and their use on the highway etc is prohibited, unless they conform to all mentioned previously, and also liable to the whole array of points fines etc above. There is a statutory exemption for some experimental hire schemes in a few UK cities. As part of the hire T&C in these schemes, insurance is provided; red lights etc still apply, though one would hardly think so from what I've observed. Legislation is up for review on much of the above. I think the above is about right, but feel free to add any corrections, particularly if there has been any legal updates or test cases.

I would have absolutely no objection, as I would normally quite openly describe myself as centre left(ish). The important distinction that I'm trying to make however, would be someone who claimed (of me), or anyone else for that matter; (I appreciate you wouldn't) "You lefties are all the same and want uncontrolled immigration so there's more people vote for Liebour" This would certainly be unacceptable, as it's projecting thoughts onto me which I don't hold, in order to use them as an unjustified/false personal attack. Several folk on this forum have been seen to use this style of comment, though if our admin notices, the post sometimes get deleted. Hence my light hearted words recently regarding Latin and "ad hominem"; It's not a new phrase to me, but it seems to be getting more relevant on this (and other) forum(s), which is what I suspect is what @SheffieldForum is seeking to address. It's always difficult to moderate forums, as well as adhering to some legal responsibilities, so perhaps out of respect for each other and our differing viewpoints, we should offer more support.

It may be more complicated than it first appears, though this is wildly outside my terms of experience. From the article posted in the Telegraph, the info came from an FOI request to a single hospital. It seems this is specifically about Universal Credit, rather than other benefit payments. Maybe something was omitted or overlooked when UC was introduced by the last government. The Telegraph report itself contains the following line; They may of course not follow it up, or decide that the provisions are correct, after review. Labour has pledged to review the policy if it enters government. A party spokesman told The Telegraph: ‘If we are privileged to come into power, Labour would urgently look at this case, including talking to the victims’ families.’ This may also be of relevance; bear in mind that this offender is subject to a "Hospital Order With Restrictions" and can only be released under certain circumstances, I think via an MOJ decision, but will certainly stand to be corrected. If anyone is genuinely interested, this link takes you to a downloadable word doc from a government web site, but I don't know enough about the subject to comment further myself. Welfare benefits MentalHealthLaw website- not direct link to the relevant act(s) Most psychiatric patients, including those subject to a hospital order, are entitled to receive welfare benefits. But patients who, were it not for their illness, would be serving a term of imprisonment, do not receive any welfare benefits: domestic and ECtHR challenges to this situation by s47/49 and s45A patients have been unsuccessful, the final judgment being SS v UK 40356/10 54466/10 [2015] ECHR 520.

Not seen that particular test before, but I've come out in my usual spot of the centre of the lower left square, as I always seem to regardless of the website.

It seems to me that the law has worked exactly as it should do; the case has been assessed by legal professionals, and the name now release post charging the individual. I provided a link on this thread, at 23.41 last Tuesday, with quite a good explanation of the reasoning behind this, and the use of the word Terrorist. Also consider that feelings nationally are quite understandably running high; the surname is unusual in the UK. Thus far, there hasn't been any suggestion that his immediate family, or anyone else, had prior knowledge or was involved. It was stated that the family used to live in Cardiff; if there are other people with the same surname living there, then they need to have protection in place before the name was released. We have already seen EDL attacking the wrong house in Rotherham previously.

Personally I feel that attaching far-hard left-right labels to other posters is unhelpful, particularly as it's often done as a personal attack on an individual for views which they may not hold. I don't have an issue with describing Britain First, Homeland, British Union of Fascists, etc as "Far Right", or groups like SWP as "Far Left", as it's pretty much a dictionary definition. I do have an issue with posters who attach labels like SWP or Fascist to other folk who may well not hold those views.

I'm struggling a bit here; What have Severn Trent Water got to do with this? Does anyone have any evidence that Stand up to Racism, and "etc" (whoever they may be) are Socialist Workers Party fronts? As far as I'm aware SWP only has a membership of around 6K; I haven't seen them particularly overt these days compared to when I was younger, and regularly saw their newspaper vendors wandering around Sheffield.

Here you go 🤦 link to emojipedia below Person Facepalming A hand shown pressing against the head of a person, commonly written as facepalm. Used to display frustration or embarrassment at the ineptitude of a person or situation. In my own experience often used by people who wish to dig at another poster personally, whilst being unable, or unwilling, so articulate an argument about their standpoint. See also previous comments about ad hominem attacks, which may be relevant under slightly different circumstances.

Another example of the dangers of misinformation. Yesterday we has issues at an asylum hostel of some sort in Manchester, which apparently did involve children among the aggressors; Protest in Manchester erupts into scenes of violence as man dragged off bus and rocks and bottles pelted at police MEN The chaotic scenes spilled into Oldham Road as Tactical Aid Unit officers raced to the scene And now; Lee Anderson’s illegal immigrants post spectacularly backfires TLE The Reform UK MP suspected a local Travelodge was housing illegal immigrants. Turns out it was international NHS nurses and their families on holiday. Anderson took to social media on Wednesday (31/7) in response to concerns that the Travelodge in Sutton in Ashfield was housing people who had entered the country illegally, saying: “I do not want groups of young men who have entered our country illegally roaming our streets. It is not racist or bigoted to say this. I love my constituency and will do whatever it takes to protect it.” But he was forced to send an immediate correction after it transpired that the people staying in the hotel were international NHS nurses.

Still ongoing by the looks of this live feed https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/24489801.live-protest-gathers-hartlepool-town-centre/ As mentioned yesterday Lennon's mate Tommo openly calling for disturbance across the country, and now being egged on by Lennon from somewhere abroad, now that he's fled the UK. Incidents also in Manchester, by the looks of it.

What's the rush to press charges on the brothers, so long as they are correctly charged, for any and all offences, within the relevant time frames? Surely it's more important to make sure the evidence is fully analysed, and completely watertight, before the CPS decide on how to proceed. I seem to remember recently one Yaxley Lennon getting a case dropped recently as a copper previously screwed up some paperwork; we wouldn't want a repeat of anything like that on this occasion would we? Clearly there was an altercation with another group before the police arrived, but what evidence do you have as to what actually happened, and who should be charged? It's likely to be on camera, and it's still possible that both (or all three) groups will face charges.

I get that Neil Basu might not be everyone's favourite person, but this article does make for credible reading Former counter-terror chief accuses Farage of inciting Southport violence Guardian Neil Basu says Reform UK leader is ‘creating conspiracy theories’ by questioning whether truth is being ‘withheld’ Not just the Guardian and Basu by any means, this one is from The Independent via Archive .ph though there are many other articles Nigel Farage risks fomenting violence and hate by pandering to the mob The thuggery foisted upon those grieving in Southport is unacceptable, writes Sean O’Grady. People have had enough of fringe right-wing groups – and opportunistic politicians – capitalising on tragedies to further their divisive agenda

But he isn't in the same position as everyone else; he's an elected official, who seems to be trying to undermine a current live investigation, by suggesting/complaining that information is being withheld. He does mention that some reports suggest that the attacker was being monitored by security services; from everything I've seen thus far, that allegation is from the fake news story, so why is he introducing it here? (unless he genuinely knows something not in the public domain, but if he does, why is he introducing it here?) Yes some information is being withheld, but that's right and proper at this stage, which as an experienced politician, and ex MEP, he well knows. At least he should know it, though Tice amongst others have shown their ignorance in writing of how the system works. See the link at the end re. his letter about Harehills I did provide an earlier link why info is distributed in a particular way and also why the use of the word terrorism id sometimes avoided, particularly in the early stages of an investigation. Some folk may have missed it with all the previous bickering, so here's the link again; all of it needs reading, not just my italicised introduction. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1818201403715621014.html Because of the misinformation about the horrific attack in Southport, I am going to use this thread to give factual information on how mass stabbings are investigated and what the involvement of counter-terrorism police means These are general processes not specific to this case In cases of all kinds, police are banned from identifying suspects who have been arrested until they are charged with an offence If the suspect is under18, they have automatic anonymity. It lifts when they turn 18, unless further restrictions made, or when a judge orders it

"When I deleted everything (files, games, vids),off the first partition of the new SSD I noticed a block of the harddrive still has data on it. I can't see what it is, I can't access it but it's there. " I'm guessing it's what I alluded to earlier. It's possibly a hidden partition, without any allocated letter, and which you can't easily access, which contains the machine's vital boot files. Without trying to talk down to anyone here, a basic explanation might be; Black box of electronics doesn't really know what it is, but has a bit of code resident on the motherboard (i.e. the BIOS), which tells the electronics where to look to identify/define itself. The black box needs a few boot files in order to find a suitable operating system to define itself as a Windows 10 computer; until this point, it could be anything, such as a Linux server, as the electronics are the same. The boot order tells it where to look for those files. It starts at the top of the list, and then works down until it finds some relevant boot files. In this case, it looks like those files aren't on C, at the top of the list, but are in a hidden partition on on a different drive. Once the bios finds those files, it is then pointed to where the operating system files reside, in this case on C. e.g. one of my machines is a dual boot W7-Linux machine; I've not used it for ages. On booting, it asks which operating system to use; I then pick, and the motherboard bios is directed to the required set of files, W7 or Linux-Mint. In my case, both of those sets of boot files, and both operating systems, reside on the C drive, but that isn't a requirement, so long as the bios is told where to look. Don't do the following without seeking further advice from someone with more experience than me; One possibility might be to download the latest Windows 10 image iso file and make a bootable USB from it; you used to be able to do that direct from Microsoft's site. Remove all drives apart from C, Boot to USB, Various options should be available; A "repair install" should find your original installation on C and offer to create a new boot file on C, without losing your installation and programs. For obvious reasons make sure all your data is backed up, and pich the correct option carefully. You may later need to re-allocate drive letters as you re-install the remaining drives.

You didn't but did mention sub-judice, a Latin phrase, so I suggested adding ad hominem to start a useful list

How about the former being spontaneous and attended initially be a few local response officers, whereas this shambles in Southport was known about in advance, so suitable preparations were made.