Dewie
LightNews LightNews
banner
judgedewie.bsky.social
Dewie
@judgedewie.bsky.social
460 followers 200 following 4.2K posts
Just some bloke
Posts Replies Media Videos
judgedewie.bsky.social
Do we stop rapists by urging women to let me grope them against their will and hope they don't go any further?

A revolting analogy I know but the logic is the same.

Appeasing awful people by giving them what they want.
georgemonbiot.bsky.social George Monbiot @georgemonbiot.bsky.social · 5h
How many times do we need to point this out?
By appeasing the far right, you do not weaken it. You strengthen it.
While weakening your own position.
There's a vast amount of academic research showing this.
But Labour will not listen.
www.theguardian.com/law/2025/dec...
Starmer urges Europe’s leaders to curb ECHR to halt rise of far right
Exclusive: PM calls for members of European convention on human rights to allow tougher action to protect borders
www.theguardian.com
December 10, 2025 at 2:14 PM
Reposted by Dewie
georgemonbiot.bsky.social
How many times do we need to point this out?
By appeasing the far right, you do not weaken it. You strengthen it.
While weakening your own position.
There's a vast amount of academic research showing this.
But Labour will not listen.
www.theguardian.com/law/2025/dec...
Starmer urges Europe’s leaders to curb ECHR to halt rise of far right
Exclusive: PM calls for members of European convention on human rights to allow tougher action to protect borders
www.theguardian.com
December 10, 2025 at 10:56 AM
Reposted by Dewie
ofalafel.bsky.social
Got one of those tree things to make the car smell nice
December 10, 2025 at 1:49 PM
judgedewie.bsky.social
You will be visited by three spirits

(that photo of Alice Cooper hanging out with Salvador Dali and Micky Dolenz)
grumpyrocker.bsky.social Harry @grumpyrocker.bsky.social · 21h
You will be visited by three spirits.
December 9, 2025 at 7:21 PM
Reposted by Dewie
bsrg1.bsky.social
The problem is profound, systemic and widening inequality, not immigration. That's it.
December 9, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Reposted by Dewie
bsrg1.bsky.social
KHAN'S LONDONISTAN NO GO ZONE WITH SHANIA TWAIN LAW
london.gov.uk Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan @london.gov.uk · 22h
Once more for the haters...
London is #1 graphic.
December 9, 2025 at 5:35 PM
Reposted by Dewie
stevemaythe1st.bsky.social
Another happy customer! (& another festive Batman message) - If YOU’D like me to draw something for you drop me a line at [email protected]
December 9, 2025 at 5:36 PM
Reposted by Dewie
bsrg1.bsky.social
Trump - weak leaders

Starmer - Q.E.D.
adambienkov.bsky.social Adam Bienkov @adambienkov.bsky.social · 1d
Keir Starmer’s spokesman refuses to criticise Trump for calling Europe a group of “decaying” nations led by “weak” leaders

Asked about Trump saying European countries will no longer be “viable" thanks to migration, Keir Starmer’s spokesman says the UK is “returning control to our asylum system”
December 9, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Reposted by Dewie
marcusjdl.bsky.social
Once again the UK prefers racism to prosperity
colinyeo.bsky.social Colin Yeo @colinyeo.bsky.social · 22h
Tighter visa rules will cost UK up to £10.8bn giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/...
December 9, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Reposted by Dewie
adambienkov.bsky.social
New Home Office impact assessment finds that cutting skilled and social care visas will cost the UK up to £10 billion with a central estimate of -£5.4 billion.

It would be good if this got even a fraction of the coverage devoted to the endless debate about boats, flags and Turkish barber shops
December 9, 2025 at 2:36 PM
Reposted by Dewie
coldwarsteve.bsky.social
Merry MAGA Christmas - High Resolution Download. £1 with whole amount going to Refugee Action Charity
👇👇👇
we.tl/p-R0X1uM5obu
December 9, 2025 at 6:46 PM
judgedewie.bsky.social
@impq.bsky.social @danmersh.bsky.social I'm so glad my heresy was met with such calm and genial responses. I shall indeed go fuck myself and acknowledge my formal disbarment. See you on NYE 😘 Loved every second of this week's episode btw 😁👏
a man in a red shirt and white shirt is standing in front of a building .
ALT: a man in a red shirt and white shirt is standing in front of a building .
media.tenor.com
December 9, 2025 at 6:47 PM
judgedewie.bsky.social
So fucking sick of "sorry - we gave in to the homophobes/transphobes". Just say no. Have a spine. Ban the away fans if need be. Draw a line in the sand. Stop doing the "we like LGBTQ people but are doing what those who hate LGBTQ people ask us to do"

See also The WI and Girl Guides.
December 9, 2025 at 6:36 PM
Reposted by Dewie
mplsnightmayor.bsky.social
The Thing (1982, John Carpenter)
A golden retriever holding an octopus in its mouth, so it looks like tentacles
December 9, 2025 at 2:27 AM
Reposted by Dewie
paullitchfield.bsky.social
Advent Calendar Day 9.

Picture of a haunted diving board.
Chocolate Samurai.
December 9, 2025 at 9:04 AM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
An important point to come out of the Sandie Peggie case is that 'gender critical' employees can't take matters into their own hands and confront trans employees. If they do that it is likely to be harassment/ bullying/ a hate incident.
So far as her other comments are concerned, they were impermissible manifestations of her belief and were in our view what amounted to an incident of harassment by the claimant of the second respondent related to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, reasonably perceived by the second respondent to be so, and were a breach by the claimant of section 26 of the Act and of the Bullying and Harassment Policy. The second respondent was entitled to view the actions of the claimant in those particular regards as being such harassment, or as a “hate incident” within the policy, and the first respondent was entitled in principle to act on the complaint made, but the detail of how it did so depends on all the circumstances as more fully addressed below. The second respondent was also entitled to regard the claimant’s actions as a breach of the second respondent’s Article 8 rights, so far as the claimant’s expression of her beliefs was impermissible. 1034. We also considered that the claimant had acted deliberately to be able to challenge the second respondent whilst they were alone. What she did was to wait until other members of staff had left the changing room, and for the second respondent to leave the cubicle, before raising her own beliefs directly with the second respondent in the manner we have set out. 1035. Whilst the claimant had not been informed as promptly and in the detail we considered appropriate, and the first respondent did not consider whether to revoke permission at all, the claimant did not herself raise any formal grievance under the policy. She is an experienced member of staff who had access to union advice. She knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the first respondent having granted permission to the second respondent she required to have raised her concerns with the first respondent as the decision-maker rather than with the colleague to whom it had been granted, and in any event ought not to have done so in the manner that she did.
December 9, 2025 at 9:20 AM
judgedewie.bsky.social
Those were the days. Deeply bitter resentment still exists between these two and thankfully Joe has moved to America otherwise I suspect they would have fought to the death on the steps of Pret A Manger near Trafalgar Square
December 9, 2025 at 12:30 AM
Reposted by Dewie
glennyrodge.bsky.social
Call that an argument? THIS is an argument.
cc @mutablejoe.bsky.social

(With thanks to Glenn Scrivener who collated this shit)

www.christthetruth.net/2013/08/11/e...
Epic Twitter Battles: Round 1 – Christ the Truth
www.christthetruth.net
December 7, 2025 at 9:27 PM
Reposted by Dewie
jontofski.bsky.social
My Wales/Japan Eki stamps will be available to use at the Japanese Embassy in London until the 16th of January. Please check their website for opening hours. www.uk.emb-japan.go.jp/itpr_en/2512...
December 8, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
Also worth noting, the Tribunal found that Sandie Peggie had harassed Dr Beth Upton in a "hate incident".
December 8, 2025 at 5:08 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
I can't help but remember that "it" is also the word used by the man who murdered poor Brianna Ghey in a transphobic attack.

These people don't have "reasonable concerns" - they are revolting bigots.
632. A wider aspect of evidence we considered concerned an attack on her position in cross examination to the effect that she was generally transphobic, which she denied both when giving evidence initially and on recall (which is addressed further below). Some of the messages she sent are indicative of views which could be described as trans-phobic. In one dated 10 January 2024 the claimant described the second respondent as “it”. In an earlier part of the same message there is reference to the second respondent having a shadow (being in our view a reference to the appearance of stubble on the face) and a “pathetic voice”. These are disparaging remarks in relation to the second respondent in our view, because of the second respondent being a trans woman. 633. In another the second respondent is described as a “weirdo”, which the claimant sought to explain as someone acting weirdly, but which we did not accept as being what she had intended by use of that word. These remarks we consider to be consistent with other evidence of her making comments the second respondent was liable to find offensive that went beyond the simple expression of a gender critical belief, but amounted to personal attacks on the second respondent.
December 8, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
Oooft. Sandie Peggie shared highly offensive messages and was then "untruthful" in giving evidence to the Tribunal.

This is the 'hero' Gender Critical campaigners have chosen.
631. The third aspect was her evidence given when recalled in relation to a message she had passed on to her group of friends which related to floods in Pakistan in the most highly offensive terms. She initially described the messages as “dark humour”. Her evidence later was that the message had been sent to provoke a reaction, in broad summary. We did not consider that latter evidence to be credible given the content of the message sent and her initial evidence about it. In our view it was an untruthful attempt to downplay what she had done, which she recognised as having included very offensive material. We consider that it was clear beyond serious argument that the author or authors of the original message considered the remarks humorous, and that the claimant had also considered them humorous which was why she had passed them on. That was supported in our view by her reference to dark humour
December 8, 2025 at 2:34 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
This is a real disaster for those - pretty much the entirety of the British media - advancing a maximalist reading of the For (Some) Women Scotland decision.
796. Thirdly, the claimant’s contention was in our view not consistent with the court’s comment that “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people (whether with or without a GRC).” 797. After that comment the court explained that a person with gender reassignment as a protected characteristic could pursue a claim of direct or indirect discrimination, or of harassment, if the circumstances so warranted. There was no qualification to it to the effect that that was not applicable in, for example, the context of a single sex space under Part 5 of the Act. If their decision had been that all trans persons must be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets for the sex they identify with because it was not the sex assigned at birth, and may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights under section 7. 798. Were the claimant’s contention to be correct that would have the effect of materially reducing the extent to which that protected characteristic could be relied on by trans persons, to their disadvantage. What was desired by the trans person when living their life may not be permitted in a large number of practical instances, and would not have been consistent with the view expressed by Lady Hale in Work and Pensions, and the line of authority in relation to human rights. Such a construction in our view would also not be consistent with the interpretation of the Equal Treatment Directive from the CJEU and its predecessor as referred to above, which remains as assimilated law, and would not be consistent with a purposive interpretation still required. The development of the law in relation to what is now the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is set out above. At the very least we would have expected these considerations to have been addressed speci…
December 8, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
Some robust criticism is made of the way in which Naomi Cunningham conducted herself. Query whether this is going to come before her professional regulator.
There were some rather unusual questions asked in cross examination, for example Ms Cunningham asked a question seeking to compare the second respondent to the torturer in the novel 1984, to which objection was taken and after the lunch adjournment but before a decision on that was made it was withdrawn. It ought not to have been asked, but does indicate the extent to which the second respondent’s position was challenged in cross examination.
December 8, 2025 at 1:41 PM
Reposted by Dewie
goodlawproject.org
This is the second decision - both first instance - since the appalling For (Some) Women Scotland decision to find that there is no trans bathroom ban. www.gov.uk/employment-t...
B M Kelly v Leonardo UK Ltd: 8001497/2024
Employment Tribunal decision.
www.gov.uk
December 8, 2025 at 1:36 PM