You stop at the R and change if to a Z. Barry = Baz, Darren = Daz, Carol = Caz etc etc. Because British English is non rhotic, it doesn’t work if we stop at the R (like USAians can say “Gar” for Gary) so the z sound gets used instead, because it’s pretty close.
Then the A gets added if you’re being extra friendly or cute, a bit like Michael > Mike > Mikey. Gareth becomes Gary becomes Gaz becomes Gazza.
Make sense?

Stupid numbfuck mongoloid.

That’s a very good point you make.

The comment I “ignored” (written after mine, so I don’t know how you expected me to take it into account) was a biased reading of history. To claim the suffragettes were “a total failure” and that the suffragists would have succeeded if they hadn’t existed is complete conjecture. Your resorting to insults shows how weak you believe your argument to be.

Absolutely incredible. The front of you to put that edit in then gaslight as though it was there when I wrote my comment.

Are you fucking serious? You really think this is going to pass through undetected?

No disenfranchised group in Britain ever gained the vote through violence.

WOMEN.

Women literally gained the vote through violence. Check your facts before you vomit your opinions all over the internet and masquerade it as analysis.

But that’s not what you fucking said is it. You said that they are costing taxpayers. So why would you give a single solitary shite about that if it’s not your taxes? Where do you live? Why are you weighing in on this as though you do live here?

You got a better idea?
Democracy is built on this shit. This is a clear attack on an elected official’s mandate. And it’s more or less the limit of what the people can do to express their discontent in modern civilised society. Or would you rather we just stayed home drinking wine and watching Love Island while our rights are eroded?
My friend you need to have a look around. Are you a fabulously wealthy while man? No? Then you’re on the same side as the trans youth, whether you like it or not.

Jesus fucking Christ. This will cost you less in your tax bill than the state’s support for the famine in Gaza.
People need to make a fucking point. Let them.

Yeah. That is absolutely the most important issue here.
Good grief, Penfold.

I love to criticise the government, I do it quite a lot. But one thing the UK gov does really, really incredibly well is its website. The gov.uk pages are one of the most intuitive and informative things to browse on the internet. It really is excellent AS IT IS. It ain’t broke is what I’m saying.
So on top of all the very valid concerns about AI accessing the information of i.e. desperate citizens looking for legal help in dire, highly private circumstances, I’ll be mourning the loss of a formerly excellent resource.

why is a Labour MP regurgitating industry lies?

Real head-scratcher, that one. Reeeeal brainteaser. An honest-to-goodness Labour MP? Shilling for think-tanks? In this economy? On Christmas Eve, in the rain?
Surely not. Because that would mean…

We have no valid voting choice as people on the left who care about progress and compassion and social justice, and haven’t since the 1970’s. Different flavours of Thatcherite neoliberalism are the only thing anyone under 50 has ever known, and the seemingly endless inertia of that failed ideology within the class-captured, self-reinforcing, closed system of government means it’s likely all we’ll ever know

Probably just a coincidence.

She already had nine points on her licence, so she’s a repeat offender, hence the book getting thrown at her.
Conversely, this happened in Oxford, which is well known for being strict on drivers. She might have got away with it elsewhere.

Well instead of guessing incorrectly, you could do a very small amount of research and find out!

As mentioned, direct action historically has produced results via political pressure.

Palestine Action has clear goals though.

Nonsense. “This kind of thing” won women the vote and got us a weekend.

Since the UK signed the UN charter in 1945, it might behoove us to conform to their definitions unless, of course the UK parliament has agreed on a different definition for terrorism?

Millions of pounds? Oh those poor pounds, they must be terrified! Wait, what? Money doesn’t have feelings and nor do fighter jets? Therefore no terror was caused, and the proscribing of this group as terrorists is therefore absurd? No, no. tHeSe DeFeNsE cOrPoRaTiOnS hAvE a RiGhT tO dEfEnD hErSeLf.

They crossed a line when they did this to a military base…

They didn’t cross the line into terrorism, though. Yes, they are criminals, no, they are not terrorists. It’s an incredibly important distinction. By definition, they are not terrorists:

criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages…

-definition of terrorism, UN resolution 1566