Is painting your face for a football match covering your face? It definitely throws off facial recognition cameras. Take it one step further, should women be banned from wearing makeup, as they use it to camouflage their facial flaws and bone structure? Or beards on men (or women)? Back to the definition of facial covering.....
Perhaps if the legislation were worded something along the lines of 'having primary intent to conceal', it might be workable.
And yes, there would need to be a definition of 'facial covering', but it must be possible to come up with one that meets a common sense sniff test.
But the reality is that all facial coverings are de-humanizing, doubly so when they're imposed on a person wearing one.
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
I think Hannan is telling a half truth. The reselection process in the Labour party was being used by Militant and similar entryist organisations to weed out the right wing MPs and replace them with hard left candidates.
In the early eighties there was quite a struggle for the soul of Labour.
"People sometimes like to think that the SDP was founded on some issue of principle: opposition to nationalisation, or to unilateral nuclear disarmament or some such. In fact, it was created because the Labour Party wanted to make incumbent MPs subject to reselection by party members.
To be sure, there were some honourable Labour moderates, including David Owen himself, who had long agonised about his support for his party. But the mass of his followers were actuated by grubbier considerations: they didn’t want to lose their seats."
Banning the burqa is preposterous authoritarianism. If a person wants to cover their face, they should be allowed to. It harms no one at all.
That's a matter of opinion. Many women do it because they are effectively given no choice.
A law which banned full face coverings would be despotic. There is also the practical point that a law would be impossible to draft, and impossible to enforce.
Of course it would be possible to enforce.
People should be free to disapprove of any barbarous superstition, including religious face coverings. Shops should be free to refuse to serve such a customer.
If people are free to wear them, it would be discriminatory not to serve those people.
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that it's about a balance of respect. As you say, in public people should be free to wear what they want. But in certain places where people's modesty is protected, like courts and schools, they shouldn't be allowed. When I'm in a school and I see a member of staff in a niqab, I feel she is disrespecting the institution and the people in it.
My first thought was Mr Bean.............. just hilarious and if he relaxes by reading French economic theory, he's more of a dork than I thought possible.
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
I already explained down thread that the point I was making there, was that we also have laws and customs that are the same in lesser degree to the "burka" (modesty laws) What a "burka ban" would be in terms of actual law would be the amount and type of flesh you "must" expose. There are several lawyers on the site that will be able to explain how hard it would be, and what precedents would be set by such a law.
Given that burkhas have been used to commit terrorist attacks, armed robberies and escape police surveillance, I think there's certainly a case to be made that you can't entirely mask your face.
Imagine if we'd never had Muslims on these shores, but a trend emerged for groups of young white kids to wear hockey masks out in public the whole time, and these hockey masks were used by people to commit crimes. We'd ban them in an instant.
Whatever the BBC policy, these polls tell a consistent story - a wasted spring for YES... There's only the summer to go - Stuart, what do you think is going to change the narrative for YES over the summer?
Mr. Eagles, must say I think that's wrong (unless you're going for 'good' leaders only, then it's arguable).
Hitler and his legacy remade the map of Europe. Even today Germans are terrified of inflation. Their response to the eurozone sovereign debt crisis was in part determined by a desire to avoid any of the inflation that afflicted the Weimar Republic. The war also motivated leaders to create the EU in a bid to try and keep France, Germany and others from another horrific conflict.
Mr. Corporeal, I have mixed views of the burka/niqab debate. On balaclavas, I don't believe women or men have been forced to wear them for cultural reasons. In the same way, dressing as Darth Vader is also not a sign of oppression.
That's a matter of opinion. Many women do it because they are effectively given no choice. Of course it would be possible to enforce. If people are free to wear them, it would be discriminatory not to serve those people. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that it's about a balance of respect. As you say, in public people should be free to wear what they want. But in certain places where people's modesty is protected, like courts and schools, they shouldn't be allowed. When I'm in a school and I see a member of staff in a niqab, I feel she is disrespecting the institution and the people in it.
Your first point is bonkers. If a woman is being forced to wear a face covering, the answer is to prosecute those who are coercing her, not to criminalise all persons who consent to wear a full face covering.
Has anyone thus far been able to draft a law which wouldn't criminalise a lot of other lawful activities? In any event, even supposing it were possible to enforce, it should still be rejected in principle.
I agree it would be discriminatory, and arguably unlawful, not to serve a person wearing a burqa. Some discrimination is fully justified, and the law on this subject is a dog's breakfast, and ought to be repealed.
Subjective reasons why people want to wear the burqa, such a desire for modesty, ought to be irrelevant. The reason why burqas should be banned in courts is that it would be manifestly contrary to the interests of justice to permit defendants, witnesses or jurors to wear them. His Honour Judge Murphy's judgment gave far too much ground to the fanatics on this issue. The test must be objective, and the law should disregard whatever barbarous and superstitious reasons people have for wearing certain face coverings.
I already explained down thread that the point I was making there, was that we also have laws and customs that are the same in lesser degree to the "burka" (modesty laws) What a "burka ban" would be in terms of actual law would be the amount and type of flesh you "must" expose. There are several lawyers on the site that will be able to explain how hard it would be, and what precedents would be set by such a law.
Given that burkhas have been used to commit terrorist attacks, armed robberies and escape police surveillance, I think there's certainly a case to be made that you can't entirely mask your face.
Imagine if we'd never had Muslims on these shores, but a trend emerged for groups of young white kids to wear hockey masks out in public the whole time, and these hockey masks were used by people to commit crimes. We'd ban them in an instant.
And that's why balaclava's are illegal.
Oh wait...
Try walking into a bank or a post office wearing a balaclava...
My first thought was Mr Bean.............. just hilarious and if he relaxes by reading French economic theory, he's more of a dork than I thought possible.
This is probably blasphemous, or at least offensive, but His Grace hasn't laughed so much in ages
pic.twitter.com/SDbmXCE9hM
Oh sorry think I "off topic'ed" this post by mistake. Of course having an "off topic" button on pb is quite funny. Can't think of any conceivable topic which could be deemed "off" here.
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
I went for FDR.
He was a lying duplicitous bastard when it came to neutrality in WW2, but he helped us win the war.
I always think of Gavrilo Princip as a contender for one of the most significant people in the 20th C. Not a leader but as the literal trigger man for WWI he directly and indirectly affected a goodly portion of the century.
My first thought was Mr Bean.............. just hilarious and if he relaxes by reading French economic theory, he's more of a dork than I thought possible.
This is probably blasphemous, or at least offensive, but His Grace hasn't laughed so much in ages
pic.twitter.com/SDbmXCE9hM
Oh sorry think I "off topic'ed" this post by mistake. Of course having an "off topic" button on pb is quite funny. Can't think of any conceivable topic which could be deemed "off" here.
I think I do that a lot with my fat fingers on the iPhone. I try to undo it but not always successful. So apols to anyone to whom this has happened!
My first thought was Mr Bean.............. just hilarious and if he relaxes by reading French economic theory, he's more of a dork than I thought possible.
This is probably blasphemous, or at least offensive, but His Grace hasn't laughed so much in ages
pic.twitter.com/SDbmXCE9hM
Oh sorry think I "off topic'ed" this post by mistake. Of course having an "off topic" button on pb is quite funny. Can't think of any conceivable topic which could be deemed "off" here.
We've all done that.
Just don't hit the flag button though.
'Cause anyone does that, it sends an email to Robert, and he gets annoyed when people misuses it.
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
I already explained down thread that the point I was making there, was that we also have laws and customs that are the same in lesser degree to the "burka" (modesty laws) What a "burka ban" would be in terms of actual law would be the amount and type of flesh you "must" expose. There are several lawyers on the site that will be able to explain how hard it would be, and what precedents would be set by such a law.
Given that burkhas have been used to commit terrorist attacks, armed robberies and escape police surveillance, I think there's certainly a case to be made that you can't entirely mask your face.
Imagine if we'd never had Muslims on these shores, but a trend emerged for groups of young white kids to wear hockey masks out in public the whole time, and these hockey masks were used by people to commit crimes. We'd ban them in an instant.
And that's why balaclava's are illegal.
Oh wait...
Try walking into a bank or a post office wearing a balaclava...
I already explained down thread that the point I was making there, was that we also have laws and customs that are the same in lesser degree to the "burka" (modesty laws) What a "burka ban" would be in terms of actual law would be the amount and type of flesh you "must" expose. There are several lawyers on the site that will be able to explain how hard it would be, and what precedents would be set by such a law.
Given that burkhas have been used to commit terrorist attacks, armed robberies and escape police surveillance, I think there's certainly a case to be made that you can't entirely mask your face.
Imagine if we'd never had Muslims on these shores, but a trend emerged for groups of young white kids to wear hockey masks out in public the whole time, and these hockey masks were used by people to commit crimes. We'd ban them in an instant.
And that's why balaclava's are illegal.
Oh wait...
Try walking into a bank or a post office wearing a balaclava...
I've certainly walked into cold post offices on a winter's day so muffled up with hat, coat, etc that the clerk wouldn't have been able to pick me out of a line up.
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
I went for FDR.
He was a lying duplicitous bastard when it came to neutrality in WW2, but he helped us win the war.
FDR has an extremely strong claim to be the greatest leader of the 20th century. He has an arguable one as the most significant too, though unlike Hitler or Lenin, his claim has to be based on both what he did, domestically and internationally, and also on what he prevented. Had FDR's leadership and New Deal failed, it's not at all inconceivable that capitalism and democracy could have broken down in the States, the consequences of which would have been almost incalculable.
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
Mr. Eagles, must say I think that's wrong (unless you're going for 'good' leaders only, then it's arguable).
Hitler and his legacy remade the map of Europe. Even today Germans are terrified of inflation. Their response to the eurozone sovereign debt crisis was in part determined by a desire to avoid any of the inflation that afflicted the Weimar Republic. The war also motivated leaders to create the EU in a bid to try and keep France, Germany and others from another horrific conflict.
The irony is that the NSDAP saw their surge in popularity after the bout of deflation during Bruning's time in office, so it should be deflation rather than inflation they're scared of.
I already explained down thread that the point I was making there, was that we also have laws and customs that are the same in lesser degree to the "burka" (modesty laws) What a "burka ban" would be in terms of actual law would be the amount and type of flesh you "must" expose. There are several lawyers on the site that will be able to explain how hard it would be, and what precedents would be set by such a law.
Given that burkhas have been used to commit terrorist attacks, armed robberies and escape police surveillance, I think there's certainly a case to be made that you can't entirely mask your face.
Imagine if we'd never had Muslims on these shores, but a trend emerged for groups of young white kids to wear hockey masks out in public the whole time, and these hockey masks were used by people to commit crimes. We'd ban them in an instant.
And that's why balaclava's are illegal.
Oh wait...
You don't often see people wear balaclavas on the high street.
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
I went for FDR.
He was a lying duplicitous bastard when it came to neutrality in WW2, but he helped us win the war.
FDR has an extremely strong claim to be the greatest leader of the 20th century. He has an arguable one as the most significant too, though unlike Hitler or Lenin, his claim has to be based on both what he did, domestically and internationally, and also on what he prevented. Had FDR's leadership and New Deal failed, it's not at all inconceivable that capitalism and democracy could have broken down in the States, the consequences of which would have been almost incalculable.
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
FDR presided over the longest economic recession, trashed the US constitution and engineered the entry of the US into a strongly opposed war as well as caving into Communist post war demands setting the stage for the Cold War. He also ignored a number of peace offers from the Wehrmacht high command, apart from that he was great.
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
I went for FDR.
He was a lying duplicitous bastard when it came to neutrality in WW2, but he helped us win the war.
I always think of Gavrilo Princip as a contender for one of the most significant people in the 20th C. Not a leader but as the literal trigger man for WWI he directly and indirectly affected a goodly portion of the century.
Except had it not been him, it would have been someone else. Significance has to rely on choice as well as chance.
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
Really? I'd have gone Stalin.
In a century's time it might be seen to be Mao for unifying China.
I considered Gandhi, on the grounds of India's future prospects, but I felt Stalin changed the path of Russia more than Gandhi changed the path of India. I could certainly see a case for Mao, but my chinese history is a little too sketchy to judge properly.
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
Really? I'd have gone Stalin.
In a century's time it might be seen to be Mao for unifying China.
I was always under the impression that it was Qin Shi Huang who unified China in the 3rd Century BC
I now to your greater knowledge if Chinese history, but I meant he rid China of foreign powers after a period of strife and division which has probably set the scene for the rise of a 21st century ( and probably beyond) superpower. Not that I'd have wanted to be involved personally as a Chinese citizen caught up in it all mind.
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
Banning the burqa is preposterous authoritarianism. If a person wants to cover their face, they should be allowed to. It harms no one at all. A law which banned full face coverings would be despotic. There is also the practical point that a law would be impossible to draft, and impossible to enforce. @Socrates attempts to argue by way of analogy for a ban, concluding that '[w]e'd ban them in an instant.' He merely shows that the vulgar mass is viciously authoritarian, not that face coverings should be prohibited.
That said, it would be thoroughly advisable to introduce a new offence of covering one's face with the intent of committing an indictable offence. That would catch those who abuse the burqa for nefarious purposes, as well as the 2011 London rioters. People should be free to disapprove of any barbarous superstition, including religious face coverings. Shops should be free to refuse to serve such a customer. In courts of justice, at border security etc. and in certain other situations, a person should be compelled to remove a face covering.
My preference is that people stop wearing the burkha due to mass social disapproval of such a misogynistic outfit. But I still think it's legitimate to require people to show their faces just as it's legitimate to require people to cover their genitals. Why is the former "viciously authoritarian" and the latter acceptable?
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Is that Karen Gillan?
Yes, the only time I really want to embrace my Muslim Heritage is the bit having seven wives.
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
While there are many good points to be made. "Banning the burka" is an infringement on the liberty of any woman who chooses to wear it of her own free will. While it sounds sensible to us, it sets a precedent that we would find abhorrent were it to be applied to other things. (we actually have laws to cover modesty ourselves, ask the "naked rambler")
So why is it any more of an infringement of burkha-wearing women's rights to ban the burkha than it is an infringement of the naked rambler's rights to ban public nudity?
Because the Naked Rambler is literally shoving his genitals down my throat whereas the woman wearing a burqa is minding her own business.
I assume you mean figuratively. But the burqa-wearing women is showing her religion's rank sexism to everyone just as much as the naked rambler is showing his genitals. Personally, I find the former much more offensive.
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Is that Karen Gillan?
Yes, the only time I really want to embrace my Muslim Heritage is the bit having seven wives.
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
It is my understanding that Muslims are only allowed four wives. Are you sure you know many Muslims?
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
It's a very young Schubert
I love Schubert, particularly the Lieder.
He has a tendency to be somewhat overlooked squashed as he is between the Classical titans like Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven and the later Romantic giants like Schumann, Brahms etc. His symphonies are staggeringly good particularly the unfinished which has such a brooding timbre.
Mr. Eagles, must say I think that's wrong (unless you're going for 'good' leaders only, then it's arguable).
Hitler and his legacy remade the map of Europe. Even today Germans are terrified of inflation. Their response to the eurozone sovereign debt crisis was in part determined by a desire to avoid any of the inflation that afflicted the Weimar Republic. The war also motivated leaders to create the EU in a bid to try and keep France, Germany and others from another horrific conflict.
The irony is that the NSDAP saw their surge in popularity after the bout of deflation during Bruning's time in office, so it should be deflation rather than inflation they're scared of.
But it was the hyperinflation that wiped out the savings of the lower middle class which caused them to became the hugely dedicated backbone of the Nazis. (By contrast, the upper and upper-middle classes did very well out of the hyperinflation: their debts were cleared and their land and stock held value, being physical assets). That the hyperinflation was seen by them as caused by foreigners, socialists and Jewish bankers (both because of Versailles and the occupation of the Ruhr / the government's reaction), simply played to the Nazis' analysis and solution: a reassertion of German strength.
Yes, the depression brought the explosion of popular support but it was in the hyperinflation that the activists were recruited and the organisation solidified.
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Is that Karen Gillan?
Yes, the only time I really want to embrace my Muslim Heritage is the bit having seven wives.
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
Using this as a seque to Doctor Who, I seem to recollect you are a fan?
Oborne is a sanctimonious twerp. His stock in trade is to heap praise on individuals he himself has deemed virtuous whilst pillorying those less favourable to his judgements. Though why he thinks he qualifies as arbiter of the nation's morals is anyone's guess. His 'Mandella is Jesus' piece is probably the most extreme expression to date of his megalomania:
Banning the burqa is preposterous authoritarianism. If a person wants to cover their face, they should be allowed to. It harms no one at all. A law which banned full face coverings would be despotic. There is also the practical point that a law would be impossible to draft, and impossible to enforce. @Socrates attempts to argue by way of analogy for a ban, concluding that '[w]e'd ban them in an instant.' He merely shows that the vulgar mass is viciously authoritarian, not that face coverings should be prohibited.
That said, it would be thoroughly advisable to introduce a new offence of covering one's face with the intent of committing an indictable offence. That would catch those who abuse the burqa for nefarious purposes, as well as the 2011 London rioters. People should be free to disapprove of any barbarous superstition, including religious face coverings. Shops should be free to refuse to serve such a customer. In courts of justice, at border security etc. and in certain other situations, a person should be compelled to remove a face covering.
My preference is that people stop wearing the burkha due to mass social disapproval of such a misogynistic outfit. But I still think it's legitimate to require people to show their faces just as it's legitimate to require people to cover their genitals. Why is the former "viciously authoritarian" and the latter acceptable?
sheesh anal retentive conformity or what ? Deep down you're a Eurocrat, we must all be the same.
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Is that Karen Gillan?
Yes, the only time I really want to embrace my Muslim Heritage is the bit having seven wives.
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
It is my understanding that Muslims are only allowed four wives. Are you sure you know many Muslims?
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
It's a very young Schubert
I love Schubert, particularly the Lieder.
He has a tendency to be somewhat overlooked squashed as he is between the Classical titans like Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven and the later Romantic giants like Schumann, Brahms etc. His symphonies are staggeringly good particularly the unfinished which has such a brooding timbre.
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
Oddly I think it was Hitler himself that named it "Sturmgewehr", ( literally "storm rifle" ).
Thanks! I always view the site with the browser justified to one side of the monitor (some document or video on the other), and it cuts that option off. Finally I can have an image that (mostly) captures my feelings.
I've change my avatar picture to what I'm generally thinking about.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Is that Karen Gillan?
Yes, the only time I really want to embrace my Muslim Heritage is the bit having seven wives.
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
Using this as a seque to Doctor Who, I seem to recollect you are a fan?
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
It's a very young Schubert
I love Schubert, particularly the Lieder.
He has a tendency to be somewhat overlooked squashed as he is between the Classical titans like Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven and the later Romantic giants like Schumann, Brahms etc. His symphonies are staggeringly good particularly the unfinished which has such a brooding timbre.
Trout Quintet I can listen to it any time.
Its very cleverly composed, and is extremely easy listening chamber music. The piano part can be fiendish though.
"However, Cable has made one mistake. He has allowed himself to become too close to Matthew Oakeshott, an insubstantial and worthless individual. Oakeshott is a Walter Mitty character: in his official resignation statement he speaks of “the party I helped to found with such high hopes with Roy Jenkins, Bill Rodgers, Shirley Williams and David Owen.” Unfortunately the founders were known as the "Gang of Four", not the "Gang of Five", as Lord Oakeshott implies."
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
I do miss recess monkey and Devil's Kitchen
Devil's Kitchen was superb, one of the origional swearbloggers. He never really got over his monstering from Andrew Neil, though.
Not exactly the most surprising finding ever published.
Peter Kellner has pointed out that over 50 years of polling, younger people have been more liberal over immigration and diversity than older people - but, they become far less liberal as they get older.
The British Social Attitudes Survey indicates that over the past 10 years, the biggest rise in hostility to immigration (and willingness to describe themselves as racially prejudiced) is among voters born between 1960 and 1979, that is, the young people of 10 years ago.
Not exactly the most surprising finding ever published.
Peter Kellner has pointed out that over 50 years of polling, younger people have been more liberal over immigration and diversity than older people - but, they become far less liberal as they get older.
The British Social Attitudes Survey indicates that over the past 10 years, the biggest rise in hostility to immigration (and willingness to describe themselves as racially prejudiced) is among voters born between 1960 and 1979, that is, the young people of 10 years ago.
They young people of 10 years ago? 25-44 is young people?
Not exactly the most surprising finding ever published.
Peter Kellner has pointed out that over 50 years of polling, younger people have been more liberal over immigration and diversity than older people - but, they become far less liberal as they get older.
The British Social Attitudes Survey indicates that over the past 10 years, the biggest rise in hostility to immigration (and willingness to describe themselves as racially prejudiced) is among voters born between 1960 and 1979, that is, the young people of 10 years ago.
They young people of 10 years ago? 25-44 is young people?
Comments
And yes, there would need to be a definition of 'facial covering', but it must be possible to come up with one that meets a common sense sniff test.
But the reality is that all facial coverings are de-humanizing, doubly so when they're imposed on a person wearing one.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100249502/few-human-beings-can-be-compared-to-jesus-christ-nelson-mandela-was-one/
In the early eighties there was quite a struggle for the soul of Labour.
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that it's about a balance of respect. As you say, in public people should be free to wear what they want. But in certain places where people's modesty is protected, like courts and schools, they shouldn't be allowed. When I'm in a school and I see a member of staff in a niqab, I feel she is disrespecting the institution and the people in it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-27616963
Those disaffected have died.
Mr. Dawning, some BBC bigwig or other reckoned Mandela was the most significant leader of the 20th century.
As was suggested here, Hitler wins by a bloody mile. Even if you only count 'good' leaders, Churchill matters more.
You have posted before about your.....exploits. (before marriage of course)
I forgot the "innocent face" But if you intend to sue, I am poorer than an illegal immigrant church mouse....Mosque mouse?
Edit, It was the reference to "gang banged by wotsits"
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/29/ukip-pie-nigel-farage-pub_n_5410612.html
UK beef
Leeks from Wales
Potatoes from Ireland
English ale
Kent carrots
Turnips (neeps) from Scotland
Smoked bacon
Suet pastry
He was a lying duplicitous bastard when it came to neutrality in WW2, but he helped us win the war.
Oh wait...
On an unrelated note. Has there ever been a Bishop Bishop?
Oh that period of my life, when people when used to rub my feet for luck.
Hitler and his legacy remade the map of Europe. Even today Germans are terrified of inflation. Their response to the eurozone sovereign debt crisis was in part determined by a desire to avoid any of the inflation that afflicted the Weimar Republic. The war also motivated leaders to create the EU in a bid to try and keep France, Germany and others from another horrific conflict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bishop_(bishop)
Has anyone thus far been able to draft a law which wouldn't criminalise a lot of other lawful activities? In any event, even supposing it were possible to enforce, it should still be rejected in principle.
I agree it would be discriminatory, and arguably unlawful, not to serve a person wearing a burqa. Some discrimination is fully justified, and the law on this subject is a dog's breakfast, and ought to be repealed.
Subjective reasons why people want to wear the burqa, such a desire for modesty, ought to be irrelevant. The reason why burqas should be banned in courts is that it would be manifestly contrary to the interests of justice to permit defendants, witnesses or jurors to wear them. His Honour Judge Murphy's judgment gave far too much ground to the fanatics on this issue. The test must be objective, and the law should disregard whatever barbarous and superstitious reasons people have for wearing certain face coverings.
Then on the left hand side
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/profile/edit
click on your name above one of your posts, the change picture button is above the avatar on that page
Just don't hit the flag button though.
'Cause anyone does that, it sends an email to Robert, and he gets annoyed when people misuses it.
I had forgotten about HIs Grace's blog, there are so many I used to look at that are no longer there. I wonder how many of the 2010 bloggers are still around.. I seem to recall Recess Monkey was one of them.. Where are they now?
Old Holborn's still going
I first learnt about Qin from the Playstation game Fear Effect, which also taught me that Sturmgewehr [umlaut over the u] is German for assault rifle. Very educational game.
Edited extra bit: anyway, better try and get some work done.
It will alternate between her Emma Stone and Christina Hendricks
Karen, like any member of Girls Aloud, could have me if she plays her cards right.
Poll revealing big generation gap on diversity suggests support for the far-right parties is vulnerable
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/firsttime-voters-far-happier-with-uks-ethnic-mix-than-over60s-9456674.html
Yes, the depression brought the explosion of popular support but it was in the hyperinflation that the activists were recruited and the organisation solidified.
sheesh anal retentive conformity or what ? Deep down you're a Eurocrat, we must all be the same.
I thought so, have you seen the new fan trailer for the next series?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7PR2AfCvUw
Not young Schubert, mind. Too much misery.
Mr. Owl, I did not know that.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100273867/vince-cable-is-more-plotted-against-than-plotting/
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/fun/s7/doctor-who/news/a573785/peter-capaldi-jenna-coleman-in-fan-made-doctor-who-trailer.html#~oFGqrwyCGI0f32
http://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=A111GB128&p=schubert+die+taubenpost
Seligkeit
The British Social Attitudes Survey indicates that over the past 10 years, the biggest rise in hostility to immigration (and willingness to describe themselves as racially prejudiced) is among voters born between 1960 and 1979, that is, the young people of 10 years ago.
Nicola MurrayAnn Barnes?