Would any British media outlet even be prepared to write that Muhammad had sexual relations with a child under 10?
If newspapers in France, Germany, Holland and Denmark have the balls to print the cartoons, why not British newspapers?
They're too scared, lack the courage to do so, and have said as much.
Does anyone know Dan Hodges address so I can send him three white feathers?
Well, I'd think twice about putting my neck on the line, too.
And, quite possibly, they'd be breaching the 2006 Act if they did republish the cartoons.
Thanks to Rowan Atkinson and the Lords, I believe the 2006 Act was changed so insulting the religion is fine as long as you don't insult it's followers. Still terrible appeasement of course, but it gives you some scope. I've been trolling jihadi sympathisers on Twitter for the last two days giving ISIS, Islam and Muhammad the stick they deserve, including retweeting various cartoons, and have yet to have the plod give me any warnings.
You're part of the problem, inflaming instead of calming these idiots down.
On the contrary, I think you ilk of appeasement is the real problem. We've pussy-footed around Saudi Arabia's intolerance for its oil for so long we've forgotten what we stand for. The problem with 'reasonable people' like yourself is that you end up tolerating the intolerant while throwing the tolerant in jail for being irresponsible towards the intolerant.
Well said. Censoring ourselves now is absolutely the wrong thing to do. It will be taken by those who want to shut us up as proof that we are cowards, don't really believe in free speech and will back down when tested.
We need to mock and satirise and laugh and treat those who would censor us with the contempt they deserve. And we need to keep on doing it until they get the message. And shut up . And stop trying to shut us up.
And then - and only then - can we go back to thinking about good manners.
"Indeed. There's free speech, and there's outright shit stirring and deliberate provocation."
For me the line is between outright shit stirring and incitement to violence. While outright shit stirring may be offensive, it has to be allowed; incitement to violence must not. And in order to test that it is still allowed, it has to be done from time to time. In that regard, whatever you think of the wisdom of some of Charlie Hebdo's cartoons, they were doing the West a huge service that most of us, and our political leaders at the forefront, were too cowardly to perform.
There is a wonderful turn of phrase used by a French commentator today - Alain Finkielkraut: "People are homesick at home", because "France [is] changing to the point of no longer being recognizable". Mutatis mutandi for the UK and most of Western Europe.
A nice turn of phrase. It's quite clear at this point that Muslim immigrants, in aggregate, are absolutely the worst at integrating relative to any other group. To stop aggravating the problem, we need to slow immigration of Muslims to a trickle at best, although I'm blase about doing this explicitly or through various policy tricks. We also need to do our best to close down Muslim schools and break up Muslim areas in our towns and cities. TSE has openly admitted that he has benefited from growing up in a non-Muslim area than a Muslim one, and integration would happen far faster if that happens. I know this all sounds radical, but if we don't do this, we're still going to have these problems in 2115.
When will you ever see heavily armed UK police walking behind a armoured personnel carrier type vehicle to a potential war zone as I saw on the BBC today from France?
I thought we saw that during the troubles in Northern Ireland?
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
I'm in the red corner tonight for luscious Liz Kendall!
Much prefer the milf filth, am I allowed to say that?
Liz Kendall having a great QT. Passionate and feisty!
I would like her as next Labour leader, still good odds.
She thinks people that come out of prison should never be able to earn the money they did before they went in
Hartley -Brewer speaking absolute sense on the Ched Evans issue
David Davis backing Liz.
I agree there are many professions (including my own) that are impossible for convicted rapists. If he is exonerated on appeal then it is a different matter.
Doctors, teachers, people who work with children.. I can see your point
But being a 3rd division footballer?
It's bullshit.. and the fact that the main campaigner is a Mike Tyson fangirl just makes it worse
I'd back him to be cleared on appeal at quite a short price, but really that shouldn't matter.
He has been released, he isn't a danger to anyone while he is working in his chosen profession, he isn't a world class superstar that kids aspire to be either
He probably will be role model for some warped types now, he will end up a martyr in my opinion
Agree. This bullying of Mr Evans and those who would employ him is wrong. Someone who has served his sentence is entitled to try and rehabilitate himself.
Talking with a brand hat on, no way the brand leader should ever create opportunities for weaker brands to get equal status. Brand Cameron can only lose and has nothing to gain. Brand Ed would almost certainly lose but Brand Farage could only build his market share.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Would any British media outlet even be prepared to write that Muhammad had sexual relations with a child under 10?
If newspapers in France, Germany, Holland and Denmark have the balls to print the cartoons, why not British newspapers?
They're too scared, lack the courage to do so, and have said as much.
Does anyone know Dan Hodges address so I can send him three white feathers?
Well, I'd think twice about putting my neck on the line, too.
And, quite possibly, they'd be breaching the 2006 Act if they did republish the cartoons.
Thanks to Rowan Atkinson and the Lords, I believe the 2006 Act was changed so insulting the religion is fine as long as you don't insult it's followers. Still terrible appeasement of course, but it gives you some scope. I've been trolling jihadi sympathisers on Twitter for the last two days giving ISIS, Islam and Muhammad the stick they deserve, including retweeting various cartoons, and have yet to have the plod give me any warnings.
You're part of the problem, inflaming instead of calming these idiots down.
On the contrary, I think you ilk of appeasement is the real problem. We've pussy-footed around Saudi Arabia's intolerance for its oil for so long we've forgotten what we stand for. The problem with 'reasonable people' like yourself is that you end up tolerating the intolerant while throwing the tolerant in jail for being irresponsible towards the intolerant.
Well said. Censoring ourselves now is absolutely the wrong thing to do. It will be taken by those who want to shut us up as proof that we are cowards, don't really believe in free speech and will back down when tested.
We need to mock and satirise and laugh and treat those who would censor us with the contempt they deserve. And we need to keep on doing it until they get the message. And shut up . And stop trying to shut us up.
And then - and only then - can we go back to thinking about good manners.
Falter now and we'll be paying Danegeld forever.
Cyclefree - agree 100%. Mock until they know it won't stop.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
.
Is this actually known? I've no idea how one would analyse the impact beyond the superficial and fleeting Cleggasm, but the LD national vote share only went up by 1% from 2005 after all, was it inconceivable they could have managed that on their own without the debates, or have a marked effect within the LD/Tory marginals even if the national vote share was little impacted?
The way around this debate thing is to change it from party political debates to Prime Ministerial debates, so only the candidates who can actually end up PM are in the debate.
As we don't have a Presidential system that is a problem, but then this has always been the problem.
I'm in the red corner tonight for luscious Liz Kendall!
Much prefer the milf filth, am I allowed to say that?
Liz Kendall having a great QT. Passionate and feisty!
I would like her as next Labour leader, still good odds.
She thinks people that come out of prison should never be able to earn the money they did before they went in
Hartley -Brewer speaking absolute sense on the Ched Evans issue
David Davis backing Liz.
I agree there are many professions (including my own) that are impossible for convicted rapists. If he is exonerated on appeal then it is a different matter.
Doctors, teachers, people who work with children.. I can see your point
But being a 3rd division footballer?
It's bullshit.. and the fact that the main campaigner is a Mike Tyson fangirl just makes it worse
I'd back him to be cleared on appeal at quite a short price, but really that shouldn't matter.
He has been released, he isn't a danger to anyone while he is working in his chosen profession, he isn't a world class superstar that kids aspire to be either
He probably will be role model for some warped types now, he will end up a martyr in my opinion
Agree. This bullying of Mr Evans and those who would employ him is wrong. Someone who has served his sentence is entitled to try and rehabilitate himself.
Technically, he is still serving his sentence. He's out on parole.
I'm in the red corner tonight for luscious Liz Kendall!
Much prefer the milf filth, am I allowed to say that?
Liz Kendall having a great QT. Passionate and feisty!
I would like her as next Labour leader, still good odds.
She thinks people that come out of prison should never be able to earn the money they did before they went in
Hartley -Brewer speaking absolute sense on the Ched Evans issue
David Davis backing Liz.
I agree there are many professions (including my own) that are impossible for convicted rapists. If he is exonerated on appeal then it is a different matter.
Doctors, teachers, people who work with children.. I can see your point
But being a 3rd division footballer?
It's bullshit.. and the fact that the main campaigner is a Mike Tyson fangirl just makes it worse
I'd back him to be cleared on appeal at quite a short price, but really that shouldn't matter.
He has been released, he isn't a danger to anyone while he is working in his chosen profession, he isn't a world class superstar that kids aspire to be either
He probably will be role model for some warped types now, he will end up a martyr in my opinion
Agree. This bullying of Mr Evans and those who would employ him is wrong. Someone who has served his sentence is entitled to try and rehabilitate himself.
I'm someone who generally is in favour of rehabilitation, however, Mr Evans has tested my patience.
This article sums it up, his father in law is funding a website to which he contributes that is currently being investigated by the Attorney-General for possible criminal identification of the rape victim and contempt of court. The other content of the website remained visible, including derogatory references to the victim which were not heard in court, and CCTV footage of her arrival at the hotel, which the victim’s father has complained makes her identifiable, in breach of her right to lifelong anonymity having suffered a sex crime. Her father said on 28 December that she had been forced to change her identity five times after continually being named and hounded on social media, and had been unable to be with her family at Christmas.
Cameron's stance cannot be defended. It's a strategic blunder at the moment. It could become a catastrophic one if the debates go ahead without him, which they may well if he sticks to his line.
There's no way in the world the Greens will be invited for all sorts of reasons, which not having read the thread but knowing the PBC community, will no doubt have already have been rehearsed. So either he sticks to his self-spiked guns while everyone else points theirs at him, or he U-turns, or he gets lucky and the debates don't go ahead. But the other three have every incentive in the world to make sure they do if they believe Cameron won't turn up.
As a non-Tory I would tend to the view that, if the Broadcasters were to respond with an empty chair, they could legitimately be accused of serious bias to the extent that they had not treated Cameron in the same way that they had treated Blair, Major, Thatcher and Wilson. Personally I cannot abide X-Factor politics and really hope the debates are scuppered. The electorate at large – I suspect – will not give a toss one way or another particularly when reminded of all the earlier Prime Ministers who turned them down.
Without Cam, Milliband has no incentive to turn up. Thats why the empty chair is an empty threat. It won't happen.
Of course he does. He can still put his case across and contrast himself with shirker Dave. I'm presuming there's nothing wrong with inviting the Greens along should a broadcaster wish to? They just don't HAVE to? So no reason why the debates can't still go ahead. Everyone want them apart from Dave. I still think he's in a corner.
I'm in the red corner tonight for luscious Liz Kendall!
Much prefer the milf filth, am I allowed to say that?
Liz Kendall having a great QT. Passionate and feisty!
I would like her as next Labour leader, still good odds.
She thinks people that come out of prison should never be able to earn the money they did before they went in
Hartley -Brewer speaking absolute sense on the Ched Evans issue
David Davis backing Liz.
I agree there are many professions (including my own) that are impossible for convicted rapists. If he is exonerated on appeal then it is a different matter.
Doctors, teachers, people who work with children.. I can see your point
But being a 3rd division footballer?
It's bullshit.. and the fact that the main campaigner is a Mike Tyson fangirl just makes it worse
I'd back him to be cleared on appeal at quite a short price, but really that shouldn't matter.
He has been released, he isn't a danger to anyone while he is working in his chosen profession, he isn't a world class superstar that kids aspire to be either
He probably will be role model for some warped types now, he will end up a martyr in my opinion
I would not want him playing for Leicester City. I await the review of his case, but from what I have read (including Evans own site) I would think the original verdict will be upheld.
While there is no legal bar to a convicted rapist working in sports/entertainment, any organisation employing the rapist should not be surprised if customers go elsewhere.
After the tragic events in Paris yesterday and today, we need to make it crystal clear to anyone who is here or chooses to come here that freedom of speech is an absolutely inviable principle of our society, and if you don't like that well tough. Nothing should be off limits for constructive criticism, end of.
But before we get too high and mighty, we should remember that the Puritans were arguably the Christian forerunner in the 16th/17th century of the modern day Jihadi's.And how were they dealt with? Well effectively they were kicked out of the church with the Act of Uniformity in 1662. It strikes me that the powers that be within Sunni Islam branch need to do something similar, and clearly restate their central message around which all decent followers can unite. Much easier said than done!
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
Apart from CO2 concentrations, what long-term trends are your referring to? Or put another way, what is long-term in relation to climate?
Talking with a brand hat on, no way the brand leader should ever create opportunities for weaker brands to get equal status. Brand Cameron can only lose and has nothing to gain. Brand Ed would almost certainly lose but Brand Farage could only build his market share.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Without Cameron the debates aren't worth showing.
Cameron should avoid them.
You missed out that Brand Cameron could be damaged by being seen as
(A) Cowardly (B) A Spoilsport (C) Lacking confidence in his arguments
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
You've got some nerve to say that after Tuesday night, when you engaged with the man and not the ball over the climate fraud techniques that the Met Office and their American brethren are using. Until you present credible independently verifiable evidence that our planet has been warming since 1998, you'll remain the laughing stock that you and the rest of the AGW crowd really are.
Ched Evans should of course be allowed to maintain his innocence. I find it a bit disturbing that people are insisting he should be forced to admit guilt if he wants to do anything of any note ever again.
I think what David Cameron has done is an act of genius. His position will give the Greens so much publicity, I would expect their polling to equal UKIP at least in a few opinion polls in the next week or so.
He sees the opportunity to bolster the Greens, and the Greens impact on Labor will cancel out UKIP impact on the Tories, putting the Conservatives ahead.
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
You've got some nerve to say that after Tuesday night, when you engaged with the man and not the ball over the climate fraud techniques that the Met Office and their American brethren are using. Until you present credible independently verifiable evidence that our planet has been warming since 1998, you'll remain the laughing stock that you and the rest of the AGW crowd really are.
LOL!!
QED my point from the other day.
Again, cherry picking 1998 like all AGW deniers. 1998 was a very strong El-Nino year. Why not used decadal units instead of individual years. You don't have to be a rocket scientist that the trend is up....
Those BBC guidelines are a disgrace. They have simply internalised a Muslim taboo and are inflicting it on the rest of us.
I do not consider Mohammed a prophet and do not want him described as such. It is not a fact. The most the BBC should say is that Muslims believe him to be a prophet.
Utterly shameful by the BBC.
They wont even call them terrorists, in particular Islamist Terrorists, which is what they are. Every other weasel phase and word is used other than calling them what they are.
These aren't people involved in a spot of civil disobedience or smashing up a Starbucks. They are intent on terrorising and killing those that don't agree with version of Islam. Trying to weasel around the fact doesn't help, in the same way of trying to use weasel words about those involved in the North West child abuse scandal.
You can't just ignore the problem and hope it will go away.
Talking with a brand hat on, no way the brand leader should ever create opportunities for weaker brands to get equal status. Brand Cameron can only lose and has nothing to gain. Brand Ed would almost certainly lose but Brand Farage could only build his market share.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Without Cameron the debates aren't worth showing.
Cameron should avoid them.
You missed out that Brand Cameron could be damaged by being seen as
(A) Cowardly (B) A Spoilsport (C) Lacking confidence in his arguments
Islington S & Finsbury: Pete Muswell = isam?!!! Errrrmmm No. Sorry to hear you couldn't go ahead with trying to get the nomination.
The way around this debate thing is to change it from party political debates to Prime Ministerial debates, so only the candidates who can actually end up PM are in the debate.
As we don't have a Presidential system that is a problem, but then this has always been the problem.
Who needs debates? This is a 5 year claim counter-claim ritual and we all know it. Its because we are not electing a President that we do not need the debates. We have endless debates and questions televised in Parliament. A debate where the only tin pot emotive party excluded is the lefty threat to Labour & LDs is a good reason for Cameron to complain. We can all see that the first response of them was not to scream and demand the inclusion of the Greens.
Talking with a brand hat on, no way the brand leader should ever create opportunities for weaker brands to get equal status. Brand Cameron can only lose and has nothing to gain. Brand Ed would almost certainly lose but Brand Farage could only build his market share.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Without Cameron the debates aren't worth showing.
Cameron should avoid them.
You missed out that Brand Cameron could be damaged by being seen as
(A) Cowardly (B) A Spoilsport (C) Lacking confidence in his arguments
As FatSteve said, I think we are seeing posturing and horsetrading.
Also quite possible that Milliband will "grudgingly" agree to a head to head debate with Cameron, thereby pushing out all bar Lab and Con, like the good old days. Indeed putting my tinfoil hat on, I have suspicion that may have been the agreed stitch up all along...
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
You've got some nerve to say that after Tuesday night, when you engaged with the man and not the ball over the climate fraud techniques that the Met Office and their American brethren are using. Until you present credible independently verifiable evidence that our planet has been warming since 1998, you'll remain the laughing stock that you and the rest of the AGW crowd really are.
LOL!!
QED my point from the other day.
Good night!
QED my point more like. Not one shred of evidence for your AGW view point. Engage in the argument instead of personal trash talk!
Talking with a brand hat on, no way the brand leader should ever create opportunities for weaker brands to get equal status. Brand Cameron can only lose and has nothing to gain. Brand Ed would almost certainly lose but Brand Farage could only build his market share.
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Without Cameron the debates aren't worth showing.
Cameron should avoid them.
You missed out that Brand Cameron could be damaged by being seen as
(A) Cowardly (B) A Spoilsport (C) Lacking confidence in his arguments
Those that already don't like him may say that, but they have already made their mind up anyway. They are irrelevant to the election result.
Cameron is the PM and can set the agenda to suit his needs. His strategy must be to use his power.
Cameron's stance cannot be defended. It's a strategic blunder at the moment. It could become a catastrophic one if the debates go ahead without him, which they may well if he sticks to his line.
There's no way in the world the Greens will be invited for all sorts of reasons, which not having read the thread but knowing the PBC community, will no doubt have already have been rehearsed. So either he sticks to his self-spiked guns while everyone else points theirs at him, or he U-turns, or he gets lucky and the debates don't go ahead. But the other three have every incentive in the world to make sure they do if they believe Cameron won't turn up.
As a non-Tory I would tend to the view that, if the Broadcasters were to respond with an empty chair, they could legitimately be accused of serious bias to the extent that they had not treated Cameron in the same way that they had treated Blair, Major, Thatcher and Wilson. Personally I cannot abide X-Factor politics and really hope the debates are scuppered. The electorate at large – I suspect – will not give a toss one way or another particularly when reminded of all the earlier Prime Ministers who turned them down.
I disagree. The broadcasters like debates precisely because they *do* like X Factor contests. They will do what they can to make sure they happen. They threatened to empty chair any leader who turned down an invite in 2010 and could do so again. The precedent is there from the Euro elections (admittedly, that was before the election period but it's worth remembering that the rules effectively state that a party that turns down a reasonable opportunity to respond or participate is still counted as having been included for purposes of coverage time).
As for Ed, he will have dodged a bullet if Cameron doesn't turn up. Yes, Farage will lob some verbal grenades in his direction but any absent leader will be the target of all those who are there for the very simple reason that they can't respond. In a 4-way debate, Miliband may well be Farage's main target but in a 3-way one the dynamics would be totally different.
He will have dodged a bullet if the Greens do not turn up. The format if they happen is still to be decided and it would be daft for Cameron to roll lover at the first shot. Furthermore to empty chair the PM would be quite unjustified - its not HIGNFY. The debates are by consent. Its absurd for Cameron and the Tories to give in to a plainly left wing biased debate. We do not see Miliband or Clegg demanding to debate the Greens. Cameron wants the debates early so they do not hijack the main campaign and he is quite right.
‘The way forward is to treat each event as a passing accident of horror’ Laissez-faire approaches like these have led us to the predicament we are in. These acts are neither passing nor accidental; they are part of one long atrocity continuum, compounded by mainstream society’s cowardice and unwillingness to champion unpopular causes. Instead, campaigning groups that happily take on the far-right should challenge the Muslim right-wing with equal ferocity, rather than giving their behaviour a free pass.
I am waiting with baited breath for the likes of BBC to kick up a fuss when Imam's have been found preaching homophobic, racist and sexist messages, in the way they wouldn't hesitate to do about the Christians or UKIP dinosaurs of this world. The whole way they dealt with the "Trojan Horse" plot was a classic example, they wouldn't touch that with a barge pole until they had to report something.
Given the position of the jet stream at the moment, we're getting all the mild south-westerlies off the Atlantic, but on the long southern reach of the jet stream British Columbia, much of the north and east of the US and the middle east are getting record amounts of snow.
I very much hope that we see a lot of snowfall here in February and March when long term forecasts are predicting it, and it would be good to see the Met Office and the government who slavishly rely on Met Office forecasts be made to look like the fools they are.
My friend, look at long term trends not cherry pick weather events. Dear oh dear!
You've got some nerve to say that after Tuesday night, when you engaged with the man and not the ball over the climate fraud techniques that the Met Office and their American brethren are using. Until you present credible independently verifiable evidence that our planet has been warming since 1998, you'll remain the laughing stock that you and the rest of the AGW crowd really are.
LOL!!
QED my point from the other day.
Again, cherry picking 1998 like all AGW deniers. 1998 was a very strong El-Nino year. Why not used decadal units instead of individual years. You don't have to be a rocket scientist that the trend is up....
Good night!
No, but any good statistician will tell you the trend is flat or down for the last decade. Its not rocket science. I wish it were as rocket science is a lot more thorough and honest about its results than climate science - which as it happens currently fails all the main tests to be considered a science at all.
Comments
We need to mock and satirise and laugh and treat those who would censor us with the contempt they deserve. And we need to keep on doing it until they get the message. And shut up . And stop trying to shut us up.
And then - and only then - can we go back to thinking about good manners.
Falter now and we'll be paying Danegeld forever.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6068/6129199685_b55cfa3552_m.jpg
Cameron also saw the results of 2010's debate which massively helped the Lib Dem's and almost certainly screwed his majority.
Without Cameron the debates aren't worth showing.
Cameron should avoid them.
Islington N: Greg Clough
Islington S & Finsbury: Pete Muswell
Hackney N & Stoke Newington: Keith Fraser
Hackney S & Shoreditch: Angus Small
http://twitter.com/ukip_hi
As we don't have a Presidential system that is a problem, but then this has always been the problem.
This article sums it up, his father in law is funding a website to which he contributes that is currently being investigated by the Attorney-General for possible criminal identification of the rape victim and contempt of court. The other content of the website remained visible, including derogatory references to the victim which were not heard in court, and CCTV footage of her arrival at the hotel, which the victim’s father has complained makes her identifiable, in breach of her right to lifelong anonymity having suffered a sex crime. Her father said on 28 December that she had been forced to change her identity five times after continually being named and hounded on social media, and had been unable to be with her family at Christmas.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/08/ched-evans-sheffield-united-oldham?CMP=share_btn_tw
While there is no legal bar to a convicted rapist working in sports/entertainment, any organisation employing the rapist should not be surprised if customers go elsewhere.
But before we get too high and mighty, we should remember that the Puritans were arguably the Christian forerunner in the 16th/17th century of the modern day Jihadi's.And how were they dealt with? Well effectively they were kicked out of the church with the Act of Uniformity in 1662. It strikes me that the powers that be within Sunni Islam branch need to do something similar, and clearly restate their central message around which all decent followers can unite. Much easier said than done!
(A) Cowardly
(B) A Spoilsport
(C) Lacking confidence in his arguments
He sees the opportunity to bolster the Greens, and the Greens impact on Labor will cancel out UKIP impact on the Tories, putting the Conservatives ahead.
QED my point from the other day.
Again, cherry picking 1998 like all AGW deniers. 1998 was a very strong El-Nino year. Why not used decadal units instead of individual years. You don't have to be a rocket scientist that the trend is up....
Good night!
These aren't people involved in a spot of civil disobedience or smashing up a Starbucks. They are intent on terrorising and killing those that don't agree with version of Islam. Trying to weasel around the fact doesn't help, in the same way of trying to use weasel words about those involved in the North West child abuse scandal.
You can't just ignore the problem and hope it will go away.
A debate where the only tin pot emotive party excluded is the lefty threat to Labour & LDs is a good reason for Cameron to complain. We can all see that the first response of them was not to scream and demand the inclusion of the Greens.
Also quite possible that Milliband will "grudgingly" agree to a head to head debate with Cameron, thereby pushing out all bar Lab and Con, like the good old days. Indeed putting my tinfoil hat on, I have suspicion that may have been the agreed stitch up all along...
Cameron is the PM and can set the agenda to suit his needs. His strategy must be to use his power.
http://leftfootforward.org/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-dismantling-nine-mistaken-assumptions-about-the-paris-atrocities/
Laissez-faire approaches like these have led us to the predicament we are in. These acts are neither passing nor accidental; they are part of one long atrocity continuum, compounded by mainstream society’s cowardice and unwillingness to champion unpopular causes.
Instead, campaigning groups that happily take on the far-right should challenge the Muslim right-wing with equal ferocity, rather than giving their behaviour a free pass.
I am waiting with baited breath for the likes of BBC to kick up a fuss when Imam's have been found preaching homophobic, racist and sexist messages, in the way they wouldn't hesitate to do about the Christians or UKIP dinosaurs of this world. The whole way they dealt with the "Trojan Horse" plot was a classic example, they wouldn't touch that with a barge pole until they had to report something.