Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count. nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged and atrocious crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
Any religion which has a significant enough number of followers to have meaningful conflict with another that is nearby will find trouble.. its not necessarily the religion, it is the distribution of power
The reason there is trouble with Islam in Europe is because it is the 2nd biggest religion in Europe, not because of anything particular to Islam
I still say if 5% of UK residents were Jews, Hindus or Mormons, there would be problems with extremists of whichever religion it was, and if the Muslim population was 0.5% we would have little or no trouble with Islamic fundamentalism
I find your final supposition extremely unlikely, and I highly doubt that any "extremists" of another minority would be murderous like Islamic fundamentalists are. The fact that you think this is quite telling tbh and I hope you just haven't thought it through properly.
Ooh a riddle!
I should say if the numbers of Jew, Hindus, Christians in the middles East, or Mormons, or whatever religion you like really, had gone from 0% to 5% in 50 years then we would be having the same problem
Why should it be any different? Why do you think when two religions try to co exist in a state there is always trouble, regardless of what the religions are?
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Hunting foxes with dogs is barbaric. However, is it something that the state should seek to ban? I would argue that yes is is, it is cruel and utterly unnecessary.
But shouldn't we tackle problems involving exclusively human beings first as a priority? The police only have limited time and resources, so any resources they spend arresting fox hunters are resources that could have been deployed on more important investigations.
How about the collection of bird's eggs or the poisoning of eagles? Should those crimes take a back-seat until there are no wife-beatings, drunk drivers, house break-ins etc, etc?
It's a matter of impact - poisoning eagles or stealing eggs can damage a tiny and fragile population of birds. I'd put fox-hunting in the same category as shooting crows.
Would you be comfortable getting a few neighbours round to corner the crow with your pet dogs and stand there cheering whilst your dogs tear it apart? Even if you go out on a limb and say yes to that, do you think it is the most appropriate method to use for population control?
I'm sure there are more humane ways to control fox numbers, but the hunts bring excellent economic benefits, enhance social cohesion, and are a wonderful tradition. Hunts in Cumbria (and elsewhere), are conducted on foot and attended by all and sundry - far, far from the bunch of horse-riding toffs which the anti-hunt lobby would have you believe are the only people in the country who partake in the sport.
EDIT: I see Casino Royale has made many of the same points, and more eloquently.
If it is purely about tradition and so-forth, then the "hunt" can continue without the unnecessary cruelty of chasing down a living creature and have it torn apart for sport.
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
I went to see the Boxing Day hunt in Tenterden a few years ago and that visit changed my mind from implaccable opposition to the hunt to opposition to the ban.
Seeing real people in the flesh and the community spirit does that to you. Who was I to impose my naive townie beliefs on them?
And yes I know furry animals get ripped apart. Twas ever thus. There are just more important issues to worry about.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
A greater number of animals suffer at the hands of Halal butchers than fox hunting. Opposing the latter is more about Class War, than any concern for animal welfare.
Have we banned rat hunting yet ? Our furry friends.
Death by poisoning must be an awful, painful way to go. We should have rat sanctuaries where they can be rehomed and looked after in comfort.
My slight nervousness about betting in terms of parties in France is the possibility of someone with a big ego either splitting one of the main parties (particularly UMP) and running for a reconstituted party or running as an independent.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count. nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged and atrocious crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
Any religion which has a significant enough number of followers to have meaningful conflict with another that is nearby will find trouble.. its not necessarily the religion, it is the distribution of power
The reason there is trouble with Islam in Europe is because it is the 2nd biggest religion in Europe, not because of anything particular to Islam
I still say if 5% of UK residents were Jews, Hindus or Mormons, there would be problems with extremists of whichever religion it was, and if the Muslim population was 0.5% we would have little or no trouble with Islamic fundamentalism
I find your final supposition extremely unlikely, and I highly doubt that any "extremists" of another minority would be murderous like Islamic fundamentalists are. The fact that you think this is quite telling tbh and I hope you just haven't thought it through properly.
Ooh a riddle!
I should say if the numbers of Jew, Hindus, Christians in the middles East, or Mormons, or whatever religion you like really, had gone from 0% to 5% in 50 years then we would be having the same problem
Why should it be any different? Why do you think when two religions try to co exist in a state there is always trouble, regardless of what the religions are?
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Ah yes, all those Mormons trying to kill Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and blowing themselves up in Theatres showing Book of Mormon. Terrible thing.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count. nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged and atrocious crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
I think no religion is immune to criticism on this, but the numbers, widespread geography, persistence and systematic nature of Islamic terrorism puts all others into the also-rans, and then some.
Worth noting that the people most at risk of Islamic terrorism are Islamic liberals speaking out against violence.
Obviously, there are terrorists who are Christians.
There aren't (at present) very many people who are motivated to commit acts of terrorism in order to impose their brand of Christianity on non-Christian societies.
I take much the same view of foxes as I do of bats. Exterminate the Brutes.
While I clearly am supportive of my fellow foxes, bats are also lovely creatures. They eat vast quantities of insects, something that I strongly approve of.
I appreciate that having bats in your bellfrey is not a pleasant phenomenon!
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
A few years ago we had a vixen and her young two gardens away and the pups would regularly come into our garden and play barely 2 feet away from us. Foxes march up and down our street on a daily basis and if bin bags are left untied any food in there will be scattered all over the place Foxes are a commonplace sight.
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
- Fox-hunting is not a significant contributor to control of fox numbers (<10% of fox death relates to hunting IIRC). It should primarily be seen, for good or ill, as a social pastime. - Halal slaughterhouses in Britain do not, as commonly supposed, operate without pre-stunning (with one exception, I believe). They were quietly persuaded to change by Elliott Morley (before his expenses issue arose). - The fact that something else is worse, or involves larger numbers, is not a relevant argument, since otherwise we can never do almost anything because there's always something more important.
I've always been heavily involved in animal welfare issues. The people I meet who are also involved are almost without exception motivated by concern for the animals, rather than class war. I once, around 40 years ago, met someone who said "It's a class issue" - I remember her because it stood out as weird. My father and uncle both went hunting (my father decided it was cruel so stopped; my uncle accepted it was cruel but felt it was too beautiful a spectacle to stop).
I don't think we need to demonise each other. It's a straightforward choice between preserving English traditions and not having a sport hinging on suffering for animals. I can see why some might feel the former was more important, but it's not a tradition that in my opinion does us much credit, and I think the Conservatives would attract ridicule as well as dislike if they set aside time for it in the next Parliament.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count. nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged and atrocious crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
Any religion which has a significant enough number of followers to have meaningful conflict with another that is nearby will find trouble.. its not necessarily the religion, it is the distribution of power
I find your final supposition extremely unlikely, and I highly doubt that any "extremists" of another minority would be murderous like Islamic fundamentalists are. The fact that you think this is quite telling tbh and I hope you just haven't thought it through properly.
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Ah yes, all those Mormons trying to kill Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and blowing themselves up in Theatres showing Book of Mormon. Terrible thing.
Yes any religion that expands quickly in a new area faces the same trouble.
"During the fall of 1838, tensions escalated into the Mormon War with the old Missouri settlers.[27] On October 27, the governor of Missouri ordered that the Mormons "must be treated as enemies" and be exterminated or driven from the state.[28] Between November and April, some eight thousand displaced Mormons migrated east into Illinois
In 1844, local prejudices and political tensions, fueled by Mormon peculiarity and internal dissent, escalated into conflicts between Mormons and "anti-Mormons".[37] On June 27, 1844, Smith and his brother Hyrum were killed by a mob in Carthage, Illinois
By 1857, tensions had again escalated between Mormons and other Americans, largely as a result of accusations involving polygamy and the theocratic rule of the Utah Territory by Brigham Young.[56] In 1857, U.S. President James Buchanan sent an army to Utah, which Mormons interpreted as open aggression against them. Fearing a repeat of Missouri and Illinois, the Mormons prepared to defend themselves, determined to torch their own homes in the case that they were invaded.[57] "
I am, of course, referring to the pro-hunting morons, not the foxes.
It's about time the police took some action on the lawbreakers, instead of spending their time patrolling Twitter.
I have to say I don't know any fox hunters. As to why hunting provokes people politically, take Cameron's supposed remarks about the indyref that he had Salmond bagged, stuffed and mounted on his wall. One can obviously laugh at Cameron's typically dumb politics as we head towards a hung parliament where the SNP could hold the balance of power and Alex might gladly hand Cameron his P45 but the comments seemed to reflect the uncultivated upper class bully that fairly or otherwise is seen as the stereotypical hunter. People have it in their minds that hunters enjoy killing animals and it's a sentiment many people loathe. They feel it is the most base human instinct and the of those who on some level are actually quite angry and looking to lash out. You might say the same thing about those who go and stand on terraces and shout abuse at footballers. But those people are generally seen as being on the bottom of the social heap (though not always) whereas hunters could well be your boss, or your boss's boss - and we know what they'll be like to work for.
I went to see the Boxing Day hunt in Tenterden a few years ago and that visit changed my mind from implaccable opposition to the hunt to opposition to the ban.
Seeing real people in the flesh and the community spirit does that to you. Who was I to impose my naive townie beliefs on them?
And yes I know furry animals get ripped apart. Twas ever thus. There are just more important issues to worry about.
Well said BenM - as a odd consequence of the ban, Boxing day meets around Wiltshire have seen much higher turnouts than prior to - only when you have witnessed firsthand do you appreciate the community spirit it engenders and the sheer numbers from across a wide social range that are involved.
"Halal slaughterhouses in Britain do not, as commonly supposed, operate without pre-stunning (with one exception, I believe)."
I believe when this was brought up before Christmas, this was shown that claim to be untrue now. I seemed to remember that it was shown that since that "agreement" was made, Halal slaughterhouses have expanded significantly and they don't all stun. In fact there are small Halal butchers who are catering for those who specifically want "real" halal meat i.e un-stunned.
Also, there is the issue of meat slaughtered abroad, it isn't as common to do so.
A couple of years ago The FT had an interview with a guy who shot foxes for a living. He liked working on his own, in the great outdoors, and had plenty of clients, councils, golf courses, farmers.
Any religion which has a significant enough number of followers to have meaningful conflict with another that is nearby will find trouble.. its not necessarily the religion, it is the distribution of power
I find your final supposition extremely unlikely, and I highly doubt that any "extremists" of another minority would be murderous like Islamic fundamentalists are. The fact that you think this is quite telling tbh and I hope you just haven't thought it through properly.
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Ah yes, all those Mormons trying to kill Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and blowing themselves up in Theatres showing Book of Mormon. Terrible thing.
Yes any religion that expands quickly in a new area faces the same trouble.
"During the fall of 1838, tensions escalated into the Mormon War with the old Missouri settlers.[27] On October 27, the governor of Missouri ordered that the Mormons "must be treated as enemies" and be exterminated or driven from the state.[28] Between November and April, some eight thousand displaced Mormons migrated east into Illinois
In 1844, local prejudices and political tensions, fueled by Mormon peculiarity and internal dissent, escalated into conflicts between Mormons and "anti-Mormons".[37] On June 27, 1844, Smith and his brother Hyrum were killed by a mob in Carthage, Illinois
By 1857, tensions had again escalated between Mormons and other Americans, largely as a result of accusations involving polygamy and the theocratic rule of the Utah Territory by Brigham Young.[56] In 1857, U.S. President James Buchanan sent an army to Utah, which Mormons interpreted as open aggression against them. Fearing a repeat of Missouri and Illinois, the Mormons prepared to defend themselves, determined to torch their own homes in the case that they were invaded.[57] "
You're using the Old West, a region beset by violence, war and genocide, to back up your claim that extremism and conflict is inevitable. I don't think you can; we live in a very different world now, as can be seen by the reponse to both Life of Brian and Book of Mormon.
After considering this subject carefully from both sides, having weighed the competing arguments and sought to reach a conclusion, I've decided that I really can't give a toss about this particular question.
I went to see the Boxing Day hunt in Tenterden a few years ago and that visit changed my mind from implaccable opposition to the hunt to opposition to the ban.
Seeing real people in the flesh and the community spirit does that to you. Who was I to impose my naive townie beliefs on them?
And yes I know furry animals get ripped apart. Twas ever thus. There are just more important issues to worry about.
Well said BenM - as a odd consequence of the ban, Boxing day meets around Wiltshire have seen much higher turnouts than prior to - only when you have witnessed firsthand do you appreciate the community spirit it engenders and the sheer numbers from across a wide social range that are involved.
Does the hunt actually need the live fox to be chased down and torn apart? Can these lovely traditions be maintained and all that wonderful rosy community spirit persist without the cruelty? Or is the cruelty necessary to attract the punters?
Any religion which has a significant enough number of followers to have meaningful conflict with another that is nearby will find trouble.. its not necessarily the religion, it is the distribution of power
I find your final supposition extremely unlikely, and I highly doubt that any "extremists" of another minority would be murderous like Islamic fundamentalists are. The fact that you think this is quite telling tbh and I hope you just haven't thought it through properly.
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Ah yes, all those Mormons trying to kill Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and blowing themselves up in Theatres showing Book of Mormon. Terrible thing.
Yes any religion that expands quickly in a new area faces the same trouble.
"During the fall of 1838, tensions escalated into the Mormon War with the old Missouri settlers.[27] On October 27, the governor of Missouri ordered that the Mormons "must be treated as enemies" and be exterminated or driven from the state.[28] Between November and April, some eight thousand displaced Mormons migrated east into Illinois
In 1844, local prejudices and political tensions, fueled by Mormon peculiarity and internal dissent, escalated into conflicts between Mormons and "anti-Mormons".[37] On June 27, 1844, Smith and his brother Hyrum were killed by a mob in Carthage, Illinois
By 1857, tensions had again escalated between Mormons and other Americans, largely as a result of accusations involving polygamy and the theocratic rule of the Utah Territory by Brigham Young.[56] In 1857, U.S. President James Buchanan sent an army to Utah, which Mormons interpreted as open aggression against them. Fearing a repeat of Missouri and Illinois, the Mormons prepared to defend themselves, determined to torch their own homes in the case that they were invaded.[57] "
You're using the Old West, a region beset by violence, war and genocide, to back up your claim that extremism and conflict is inevitable. I don't think you can; we live in a very different world now, as can be seen by the reponse to both Life of Brian and Book of Mormon.
No
I gave numerous other examples too
What have The Life of Brian or Book of Mormon got to do with it? You are missing the point. There is no violent conflict there because there is nothing to conflict with
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
A few years ago we had a vixen and her young two gardens away and the pups would regularly come into our garden and play barely 2 feet away from us. Foxes march up and down our street on a daily basis and if bin bags are left untied any food in there will be scattered all over the place Foxes are a commonplace sight.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
There was a cracking picture of one running down Downing Street in daylight about a week ago. Urban foxes are an increasing nuisance in this throw away society and hunting is completely irrelevant to them. Is there any evidence from an even vaguely impartial source that the restriction in hunting with dogs has had any impact in the country?
Personally, I don't care about this that much. I don't like the idea of killing animals as an entertainment. I have refused offers to go shooting in the past. But it is one of the many things when I am willing to accept that others have a different view and if it is ok with their morals so be it. It would not be on my list of 100 reasons for voting one way or another, that is for sure.
@Socrates, et al, re continued discussions about the prophet.
I regard freedom of speech and freedom to offend as fundamental. The idea the state should have any kind of power over what I do or do not say is abhorrent and repellent.
I also believe that the state should not criminalise who people sleep with. (Assuming its between consenting adults!)
Those cartoon are like cheating on your wife. Something whose legality should be defended to the death. But they are also something which is rather impolite. While I would tweet my abhorrence with the acts of the murderers and my absolute defence of free speech, I would not retweet the cartoons themselves. Not because it should be illegal to do so, but because I regard them as offensive.
Some of the cartoons were offensive, others were not. I hope you're not taking the position that all images of Muhammad are offensive.
However, when the right to free speech is under attack, I am happy to retweet even offensive images if those are the ones people are seeking to ban.
Offence is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes I go out of my way to avoid causing offence, and sometimes I deliberately cause offence, as is my right.
I would not regard a picture (or cartoon) - such as this specimen - as being offensive by its very act of existing.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
There was a cracking picture of one running down Downing Street in daylight about a week ago. Urban foxes are an increasing nuisance in this throw away society and hunting is completely irrelevant to them. Is there any evidence from an even vaguely impartial source that the restriction in hunting with dogs has had any impact in the country?
Personally, I don't care about this that much. I don't like the idea of killing animals as an entertainment. I have refused offers to go shooting in the past. But it is one of the many things when I am willing to accept that others have a different view and if it is ok with their morals so be it. It would not be on my list of 100 reasons for voting one way or another, that is for sure.
Shouldn't we organise urban hunts on Harley Davidson's and with sawn off shotguns?
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
There was a cracking picture of one running down Downing Street in daylight about a week ago. Urban foxes are an increasing nuisance in this throw away society and hunting is completely irrelevant to them. Is there any evidence from an even vaguely impartial source that the restriction in hunting with dogs has had any impact in the country?
Personally, I don't care about this that much. I don't like the idea of killing animals as an entertainment. I have refused offers to go shooting in the past. But it is one of the many things when I am willing to accept that others have a different view and if it is ok with their morals so be it. It would not be on my list of 100 reasons for voting one way or another, that is for sure.
Shouldn't we organise urban hunts on Harley Davidson's and with sawn off shotguns?
There are some hunts like that on some estates in Dundee but they don't have anything to do with foxes.
I went to see the Boxing Day hunt in Tenterden a few years ago and that visit changed my mind from implaccable opposition to the hunt to opposition to the ban.
Seeing real people in the flesh and the community spirit does that to you. Who was I to impose my naive townie beliefs on them?
And yes I know furry animals get ripped apart. Twas ever thus. There are just more important issues to worry about.
Well said BenM - as a odd consequence of the ban, Boxing day meets around Wiltshire have seen much higher turnouts than prior to - only when you have witnessed firsthand do you appreciate the community spirit it engenders and the sheer numbers from across a wide social range that are involved.
Does the hunt actually need the live fox to be chased down and torn apart? Can these lovely traditions be maintained and all that wonderful rosy community spirit persist without the cruelty? Or is the cruelty necessary to attract the punters?
You have made your opinion abundantly clear – further discussion on the subject is pointless.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
A few years ago we had a vixen and her young two gardens away and the pups would regularly come into our garden and play barely 2 feet away from us. Foxes march up and down our street on a daily basis and if bin bags are left untied any food in there will be scattered all over the place Foxes are a commonplace sight.
Saw a large fox walking across the road in front of me in the centre of town the other night. And it wasn't even midnight. I have seen a few this year suggesting they are on the up but there wasn't an active hunt around here in my life time so that is pure coincidence.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Where I live, Greater London, there are urban foxes all over the place
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
There was a cracking picture of one running down Downing Street in daylight about a week ago. Urban foxes are an increasing nuisance in this throw away society and hunting is completely irrelevant to them. Is there any evidence from an even vaguely impartial source that the restriction in hunting with dogs has had any impact in the country?
Personally, I don't care about this that much. I don't like the idea of killing animals as an entertainment. I have refused offers to go shooting in the past. But it is one of the many things when I am willing to accept that others have a different view and if it is ok with their morals so be it. It would not be on my list of 100 reasons for voting one way or another, that is for sure.
Shouldn't we organise urban hunts on Harley Davidson's and with sawn off shotguns?
The whole acute sector is unsustainable since Lansley let Primary Care decide whether to give monies to itself or to Acute Hospitals. GP conflict of interest has bankrupted the Acute Sector
Circles decision would be made by any Acute Provider seeking to make a return whether they be private or NHS. Unfortunately from their financial point of view the Provider licences of NHS hospitals does not allow them to cut and run.
Which is fortunate for the patients but doesnt stop the current system being completely unsustainable as Circle seems to have concluded.
After considering this subject carefully from both sides, having weighed the competing arguments and sought to reach a conclusion, I've decided that I really can't give a toss about this particular question.
I would like to associate myself with the comment made by my honourable friend.
I only remotely care from the point of view of diverting the constabulary from more important matters.
Foxes die one way or another. Research is inconclusive:
Lord Burns (author of the report on the subject):
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
I understand where you are coming from. I can only restate part of my previous comment: "We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do."
A greater number of animals suffer at the hands of Halal butchers than fox hunting. Opposing the latter is more about Class War, than any concern for animal welfare.
exactly and means more foxes get shot to pieces so does not make a lot of difference to foxes other than it is easier to avoid the dogs than a load of buckshot
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
The whole acute sector is unsustainable since Lansley let Primary Care decide whether to give monies to itself or to Acute Hospitals. GP conflict of interest has bankrupted the Acute Sector
Circles decision would be made by any Acute Provider seeking to make a return whether they be private or NHS. Unfortunately from their financial point of view the Provider licences of NHS hospitals does not allow them to cut and run.
Which is fortunate for the patients but doesnt stop the current system being completely unsustainable as Circle seems to have concluded.
Lansley has royally fooked the NHS Acute Sector.
All parties want to see more treatments closer to home and at clinics not hospitals. You just fooked yourself.
Labour theorising will just lead to even more expense . '' “Whole person care” is no exception. It implies a re-allocation of resources to treat people at home and a strategy to encourage patients with chronic conditions to get more treatment at clinics and GP surgeries. It recognises what consultants and healthcare experts have been privately complaining about for years: that many hospitals wards are effectively emergency housing for geriatric patients, which is bad for them and a poor use of resources. But a better use of resources might mean, gulp, fewer wards.'' ''Buried in that loose expression of good intent is small print so minuscule it is invisible to the naked eye. It says that that a Labour government could end up closing hospitals too. ''
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
A greater number of animals suffer at the hands of Halal butchers than fox hunting. Opposing the latter is more about Class War, than any concern for animal welfare.
exactly and means more foxes get shot to pieces so does not make a lot of difference to foxes other than it is easier to avoid the dogs than a load of buckshot
Malcom and The Watcher agree. The End Times are truly upon us.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Because it's almost 3 times the land area and has borders with 6(?) countries?
A greater number of animals suffer at the hands of Halal butchers than fox hunting. Opposing the latter is more about Class War, than any concern for animal welfare.
exactly and means more foxes get shot to pieces so does not make a lot of difference to foxes other than it is easier to avoid the dogs than a load of buckshot
Malcom and The Watcher agree. The End Times are truly upon us.
Most people couldn't care less unless they are forced to think about it and then instinctively they think of the childhood stories and think "oh no surely not foxy".
The fox has an image unproblem which, say, a rat doesn't.
But the fact remains that it is vermin and will be killed regardless of who's doing the killing with no method better or worse, cruelty-wise, than another.
Political advantageously however it is a positive for Lab because iconic as the image may be, supporting poshos on horses doesn't play well for Cam.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Having so many armed police may be one of the problems.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Because it's almost 3 times the land area and has borders with 6(?) countries?
Didn't realise fields were such hot-beds of criminality. A lot of vine rustling, presumably. And given the schengen agreement, there's virtually no police presence at their land borders.
It may surprise some on here that i actually believe a private company could run a hospital.
Only if a fair system of remuneration for the acute sector existed.
Unfortunately that is not currently the case and emergency care does not pay.
Monitor has been consulting for 3 years to come up with a system to replace the currently unsustainable one.
Meanwhile NHS Foundation Trusts receive only 30% tariff on all additional patients (above 2010 activity levels) making a loss on all of these is inevitable.
I predict a number of Hospitals will either have to receive significant bail outs, go bust or refuse to treat, this winter.
As the latter two options would be politically impossible the bail out sticking plasters will be applied but proper reform of the tariff system is a must if acute hospitals are to be sustainable IMO
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Because it's almost 3 times the land area and has borders with 6(?) countries?
Didn't realise fields were such hot-beds of criminality. A lot of vine rustling, presumably. And given the schengen agreement, there's virtually no police presence at their land borders.
Yep, no crime in the countryside, and illegal immigration a non-existent problem in France.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
That 129k figure is misleading.
It only refers to police forces in England & Wales and British Transport Police.
It doesn't include the PSNI or the Scottish Police Force.
IIRC, the French police do a lot of work of that is currently done by the UK Border Force and the Courts Service/Bailiffs. (Add in we're an Island country, and Le Grenouilles have borders with a few countries you can see why they have more officers)
Plus our total doesn't include Police Community Service Officers, whereas their French equivalents are lumped into the 278k figure
These guys are dead because back in 2005, these Danish cartoons were published in an obscure Jutland newspaper, and a bunch of fanatics went bananas and started killing people over them. So a couple of publications on the planet, including mine in Canada, and Charlie Hebdo in Paris, published these cartoons... Le Monde didn't, and the Times of London didn't, and the New York Times didn't, and nobody else did. And as a result, these fellows in Charlie Hebdo became the focus of murderous rage. If we'd all just published them on the front page and said "If you want to kill us, you go to hell, you can't just kill a couple of obscure Danes, you're going to have to kill us all", we wouldn't have this problem. But because nobody did that, these Parisian guys are dead. They're dead. And I've been on enough, I've been on enough events in Europe with less famous cartoonists than these who live under death threats, live under armed guard, have had their family restaurant firebombed - it's happened to a Norwegian comedienne I know - have come home and found their home burned, as a Swedish artist I know happened to. And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity. Let's have some real solidarity - or if not, at least have the good taste to stay the hell out of it.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
The whole acute sector is unsustainable since Lansley let Primary Care decide whether to give monies to itself or to Acute Hospitals. GP conflict of interest has bankrupted the Acute Sector
Circles decision would be made by any Acute Provider seeking to make a return whether they be private or NHS. Unfortunately from their financial point of view the Provider licences of NHS hospitals does not allow them to cut and run.
Which is fortunate for the patients but doesnt stop the current system being completely unsustainable as Circle seems to have concluded.
Lansley has royally fooked the NHS Acute Sector.
All parties want to see more treatments closer to home and at clinics not hospitals. You just fooked yourself.
Labour theorising will just lead to even more expense . '' “Whole person care” is no exception. It implies a re-allocation of resources to treat people at home and a strategy to encourage patients with chronic conditions to get more treatment at clinics and GP surgeries. It recognises what consultants and healthcare experts have been privately complaining about for years: that many hospitals wards are effectively emergency housing for geriatric patients, which is bad for them and a poor use of resources. But a better use of resources might mean, gulp, fewer wards.'' ''Buried in that loose expression of good intent is small print so minuscule it is invisible to the naked eye. It says that that a Labour government could end up closing hospitals too. ''
I agree I want to see more treatments closer to home and at clinics not hospitals.
Acute hospitals do not want to see the current level of A&E attendances.They will go bust if this continues as Circle has realised, patient care quality will suffer too.
The Govt needs to stop cutting social care and invest in community and social care.
Unforunately this has been cut rather than invested in leaving Acute hospitals to act as free hotels for the golden generation and full of loss making patients who will get worse and worse care as hospitals cut costs to avoid going bankrupt.
Bad system for the patients unsustainable for the providers too.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Because it's almost 3 times the land area and has borders with 6(?) countries?
Didn't realise fields were such hot-beds of criminality. A lot of vine rustling, presumably. And given the schengen agreement, there's virtually no police presence at their land borders.
Yep, no crime in the countryside, and illegal immigration a non-existent problem in France.
Carry on.
EDITED after reading TSE's post which explains most of the difference. Now sounds suspiciously like the UK police leveraging the situation with misleading stats to attack our government over the cuts. Plus ca change, as they may say in France.
Still not convinced the border thing is a big deal after schengen.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count, nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged, atrocious and, yes, terroristic crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
I am not saying it would be exactly the same but there would be tensions if they went up at the same rate to a significant % of population
5% of the UK are Muslims, and 1.6% are Hindu's so it isn't the same, plus the UK has by far the biggest % of Hindus in Western Europe, whereas we have nowhere near the % of Muslims as some other Western European countries
If you look at it as a Europe wide problem, it is obvious why the problem is with Islamic extremism not Hindu extremism
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity.
I wonder how many liberals tweeting je suis JUIF today were solidly behind Hamas - an organisation that wants Israel wiped off the map - just a few months ago.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Because it's almost 3 times the land area and has borders with 6(?) countries?
Didn't realise fields were such hot-beds of criminality. A lot of vine rustling, presumably. And given the schengen agreement, there's virtually no police presence at their land borders.
As attested by my sneaking a 100 yards or so into France after visiting nearby CERN in Geneva a few months back
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
isam thinks all brown people are the same
I'm not sure a smiley face quite gets you off the hook with a comment like that, Sunil.
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
As a vegetarian can I point out there really isn't that much difference between Halal and "traditional" butchery?
And, again, Quran 28:55 instructs, “Whenever they (believers) hear vain talk of ridicule, they withdraw from it decently and say, ‘“To us our deeds and to you yours; Peace be upon you, we do not seek to join the ignorant.”
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
isam thinks all brown people are the same
I'm not sure a smiley face quite gets you off the hook with a comment like that, Sunil.
Hooks? I thought we're talking about hunting, not fishing!
I wonder how many liberals tweeting je suis JUIF today were solidly behind Hamas - an organisation that wants Israel wiped off the map - just a few months ago.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
isam thinks all brown people are the same
Easy!
It would be the same if White Christians were the growing minority too, Iand I expect in 2115 there will be tensions between minority White Christian immigrants to India & the Middle East etc as the world economy moves
Maybe China too although they are becoming more Christian I believe
We're never going to agree. I just don't afford a pestilent animal the same level protection from harm that you do. As has been mentioned, there's no ban on shooting gamefowl, or rabbits, or fishing. With a shotgun the likelihood of an immediate kill is remote and animals will die in pain. And yet there is no clamour to stop it as there was with foxes. It's a synthentic and hypocritical situation set up as part of the ongoing class war instigated by the left.
It's not the killing of animals I object to. It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
As a vegetarian can I point out there really isn't that much difference between Halal and "traditional" butchery?
I once heard Halal/Kosher described as slaughter with added cruelty.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count, nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged, atrocious and, yes, terroristic crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt #paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Having so many armed police may be one of the problems.
Why?
If what is happening in France today is a portent of what will happen in the UK tomorrow we will need rather more coppers, armed ones, too.
Whenever the topic of Christian terrorism is raised, out come the rhetorical salami-slicers which could put any Waitrose delicatessen to shame -- "Oh no, Breivik doesn't count, nor do the IRA!" etc.
Will people at least concede that the prolonged, atrocious and, yes, terroristic crimes of the KKK and Eric Rudolph were motivated by a warped and sectarian interpretation of Christianity?
Even a religion as benevolent as Buddhism has proven capable of inspiring terrorism (Japan's Aum Shirikyo cult). Christianity does not have some magical exemption.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity.
I wonder how many liberals tweeting je suis JUIF today were solidly behind Hamas - an organisation that wants Israel wiped off the map - just a few months ago.
Don't worry: there's bound to be some commentator somewhere soon enough blaming Israel or Jews' support for Israel for what has happened.
There was some pretty distasteful commentary along those lines after the shooting of Jewish children in Toulouse a few years back.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Maybe not so much with upper class Brahmin immigrants but how about with the lower caste Romani Gypsies?
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Maybe not so much with upper class Brahmin immigrants but how about with the lower caste Romani Gypsies?
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity.
I wonder how many liberals tweeting je suis JUIF today were solidly behind Hamas - an organisation that wants Israel wiped off the map - just a few months ago.
Don't worry: there's bound to be some commentator somewhere soon enough blaming Israel or Jews' support for Israel for what has happened.
There was some pretty distasteful commentary along those lines after the shooting of Jewish children in Toulouse a few years back.
One of the attackers apparently said they didn't kill civilians.
Interesting to note that therefore in their eyes, Jews are not civilians. Which presumably makes them combatants. Which is a pretty sobering not to say worrying thought for Jews worldwide.
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Maybe not so much with upper class Brahmin immigrants but how about with the lower caste Romani Gypsies?
Are they hindu ?!
They seem to do a bit everything if Wikipedia is right, basically they do their own thing is my guess.
These guys are dead because back in 2005, these Danish cartoons were published in an obscure Jutland newspaper, and a bunch of fanatics went bananas and started killing people over them. So a couple of publications on the planet, including mine in Canada, and Charlie Hebdo in Paris, published these cartoons... Le Monde didn't, and the Times of London didn't, and the New York Times didn't, and nobody else did. And as a result, these fellows in Charlie Hebdo became the focus of murderous rage. If we'd all just published them on the front page and said "If you want to kill us, you go to hell, you can't just kill a couple of obscure Danes, you're going to have to kill us all", we wouldn't have this problem. But because nobody did that, these Parisian guys are dead. They're dead. And I've been on enough, I've been on enough events in Europe with less famous cartoonists than these who live under death threats, live under armed guard, have had their family restaurant firebombed - it's happened to a Norwegian comedienne I know - have come home and found their home burned, as a Swedish artist I know happened to. And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity. Let's have some real solidarity - or if not, at least have the good taste to stay the hell out of it.
I think it's at war with a culture that basically does not have the spirit of liberty and the spirit of intellectual inquiry. So you can come up with the most devastating, witty, trenchant argument, and the other fellow is just going to reach for the scimitar and slice your head off. And that calls into question, I think it does call into question as to whether Europe, in allowing Islam to nest within Western pluralistic democracies, has actually placed an existential question over its future. That's a real question for France today.
Comments
I should say if the numbers of Jew, Hindus, Christians in the middles East, or Mormons, or whatever religion you like really, had gone from 0% to 5% in 50 years then we would be having the same problem
Why should it be any different? Why do you think when two religions try to co exist in a state there is always trouble, regardless of what the religions are?
Mormons in Salt Lake City, Catholics in Southern Ireland, Muslims in Europe, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Communists in Russia.. The division of India into three states... the same logic applies
Turnout was a miserable 13%.
Seeing real people in the flesh and the community spirit does that to you. Who was I to impose my naive townie beliefs on them?
And yes I know furry animals get ripped apart. Twas ever thus. There are just more important issues to worry about.
The self discipline in not even raising this issue in this Parliament on the part of the tories has been impressive. Anything under 100 majority and they should do the same in the next.
Ok exaggeration, but it isn't surprising to see one walking the streets or in the garden.
There aren't (at present) very many people who are motivated to commit acts of terrorism in order to impose their brand of Christianity on non-Christian societies.
http://news.sky.com/story/1404969/at-least-six-hostages-in-paris-supermarket
Sunil - seven polls this week - four YouGov, two Populus, one Opinium.
All now on Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election
It is the unnecessarily cruel and downright inhumane manner, all in the name of sport. Not food, not pest control, sport.
Killing animals is a dirty business and will inevitably have an element of cruelty built-in. We should seek to minimise this as much as possible. Saying that fox hunting must be ok, as we still kill animal x by y method is spurious.
- Fox-hunting is not a significant contributor to control of fox numbers (<10% of fox death relates to hunting IIRC). It should primarily be seen, for good or ill, as a social pastime.
- Halal slaughterhouses in Britain do not, as commonly supposed, operate without pre-stunning (with one exception, I believe). They were quietly persuaded to change by Elliott Morley (before his expenses issue arose).
- The fact that something else is worse, or involves larger numbers, is not a relevant argument, since otherwise we can never do almost anything because there's always something more important.
I've always been heavily involved in animal welfare issues. The people I meet who are also involved are almost without exception motivated by concern for the animals, rather than class war. I once, around 40 years ago, met someone who said "It's a class issue" - I remember her because it stood out as weird. My father and uncle both went hunting (my father decided it was cruel so stopped; my uncle accepted it was cruel but felt it was too beautiful a spectacle to stop).
I don't think we need to demonise each other. It's a straightforward choice between preserving English traditions and not having a sport hinging on suffering for animals. I can see why some might feel the former was more important, but it's not a tradition that in my opinion does us much credit, and I think the Conservatives would attract ridicule as well as dislike if they set aside time for it in the next Parliament.
"During the fall of 1838, tensions escalated into the Mormon War with the old Missouri settlers.[27] On October 27, the governor of Missouri ordered that the Mormons "must be treated as enemies" and be exterminated or driven from the state.[28] Between November and April, some eight thousand displaced Mormons migrated east into Illinois
In 1844, local prejudices and political tensions, fueled by Mormon peculiarity and internal dissent, escalated into conflicts between Mormons and "anti-Mormons".[37] On June 27, 1844, Smith and his brother Hyrum were killed by a mob in Carthage, Illinois
By 1857, tensions had again escalated between Mormons and other Americans, largely as a result of accusations involving polygamy and the theocratic rule of the Utah Territory by Brigham Young.[56] In 1857, U.S. President James Buchanan sent an army to Utah, which Mormons interpreted as open aggression against them. Fearing a repeat of Missouri and Illinois, the Mormons prepared to defend themselves, determined to torch their own homes in the case that they were invaded.[57] "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormons
I believe when this was brought up before Christmas, this was shown that claim to be untrue now. I seemed to remember that it was shown that since that "agreement" was made, Halal slaughterhouses have expanded significantly and they don't all stun. In fact there are small Halal butchers who are catering for those who specifically want "real" halal meat i.e un-stunned.
Also, there is the issue of meat slaughtered abroad, it isn't as common to do so.
I gave numerous other examples too
What have The Life of Brian or Book of Mormon got to do with it? You are missing the point. There is no violent conflict there because there is nothing to conflict with
Personally, I don't care about this that much. I don't like the idea of killing animals as an entertainment. I have refused offers to go shooting in the past. But it is one of the many things when I am willing to accept that others have a different view and if it is ok with their morals so be it. It would not be on my list of 100 reasons for voting one way or another, that is for sure.
I would not regard a picture (or cartoon) - such as this specimen - as being offensive by its very act of existing.
The whole acute sector is unsustainable since Lansley let Primary Care decide whether to give monies to itself or to Acute Hospitals. GP conflict of interest has bankrupted the Acute Sector
Circles decision would be made by any Acute Provider seeking to make a return whether they be private or NHS. Unfortunately from their financial point of view the Provider licences of NHS hospitals does not allow them to cut and run.
Which is fortunate for the patients but doesnt stop the current system being completely unsustainable as Circle seems to have concluded.
Lansley has royally fooked the NHS Acute Sector.
I only remotely care from the point of view of diverting the constabulary from more important matters.
Lord Burns (author of the report on the subject):
"Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel... The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty. It is a complex area."
It is more/all about class warfare.
#paristerror UK cop source: UK and Fr w similar 60m population. Fr has 278,000 cops, most armed, UK 129,000 cops and few armed.
Why does La République need so many rozzers?
Labour theorising will just lead to even more expense .
'' “Whole person care” is no exception. It implies a re-allocation of resources to treat people at home and a strategy to encourage patients with chronic conditions to get more treatment at clinics and GP surgeries. It recognises what consultants and healthcare experts have been privately complaining about for years: that many hospitals wards are effectively emergency housing for geriatric patients, which is bad for them and a poor use of resources. But a better use of resources might mean, gulp, fewer wards.''
''Buried in that loose expression of good intent is small print so minuscule it is invisible to the naked eye. It says that that a Labour government could end up closing hospitals too. ''
Or to put it in your polite terms, close hospitals after ''royally fooking'' them.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/04/labour-recognises-it-could-end-closing-hospitals-too
The fox has an image unproblem which, say, a rat doesn't.
But the fact remains that it is vermin and will be killed regardless of who's doing the killing with no method better or worse, cruelty-wise, than another.
Political advantageously however it is a positive for Lab because iconic as the image may be, supporting poshos on horses doesn't play well for Cam.
Interesting article.
It may surprise some on here that i actually believe a private company could run a hospital.
Only if a fair system of remuneration for the acute sector existed.
Unfortunately that is not currently the case and emergency care does not pay.
Monitor has been consulting for 3 years to come up with a system to replace the currently unsustainable one.
Meanwhile NHS Foundation Trusts receive only 30% tariff on all additional patients (above 2010 activity levels) making a loss on all of these is inevitable.
I predict a number of Hospitals will either have to receive significant bail outs, go bust or refuse to treat, this winter.
As the latter two options would be politically impossible the bail out sticking plasters will be applied but proper reform of the tariff system is a must if acute hospitals are to be sustainable IMO
Carry on.
It only refers to police forces in England & Wales and British Transport Police.
It doesn't include the PSNI or the Scottish Police Force.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-workforce-england-and-wales-31-march-2013/police-workforce-england-and-wales-31-march-2013
IIRC, the French police do a lot of work of that is currently done by the UK Border Force and the Courts Service/Bailiffs. (Add in we're an Island country, and Le Grenouilles have borders with a few countries you can see why they have more officers)
Plus our total doesn't include Police Community Service Officers, whereas their French equivalents are lumped into the 278k figure
These guys are dead because back in 2005, these Danish cartoons were published in an obscure Jutland newspaper, and a bunch of fanatics went bananas and started killing people over them. So a couple of publications on the planet, including mine in Canada, and Charlie Hebdo in Paris, published these cartoons... Le Monde didn't, and the Times of London didn't, and the New York Times didn't, and nobody else did. And as a result, these fellows in Charlie Hebdo became the focus of murderous rage. If we'd all just published them on the front page and said "If you want to kill us, you go to hell, you can't just kill a couple of obscure Danes, you're going to have to kill us all", we wouldn't have this problem. But because nobody did that, these Parisian guys are dead. They're dead. And I've been on enough, I've been on enough events in Europe with less famous cartoonists than these who live under death threats, live under armed guard, have had their family restaurant firebombed - it's happened to a Norwegian comedienne I know - have come home and found their home burned, as a Swedish artist I know happened to. And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity. Let's have some real solidarity - or if not, at least have the good taste to stay the hell out of it.
http://www.steynonline.com/6743/screw-your-hashtag-solidarity
The number of Hindus in the UK HAS gone up at a similar rate to the number of Muslims. As far as I'm aware, there's hardly any Hindu-Christian tension. Mainly because Hinduism doesn't have the extremist tendencies of Islam.
Acute hospitals do not want to see the current level of A&E attendances.They will go bust if this continues as Circle has realised, patient care quality will suffer too.
The Govt needs to stop cutting social care and invest in community and social care.
Unforunately this has been cut rather than invested in leaving Acute hospitals to act as free hotels for the golden generation and full of loss making patients who will get worse and worse care as hospitals cut costs to avoid going bankrupt.
Bad system for the patients unsustainable for the providers too.
Still not convinced the border thing is a big deal after schengen.
5% of the UK are Muslims, and 1.6% are Hindu's so it isn't the same, plus the UK has by far the biggest % of Hindus in Western Europe, whereas we have nowhere near the % of Muslims as some other Western European countries
If you look at it as a Europe wide problem, it is obvious why the problem is with Islamic extremism not Hindu extremism
I wonder how many liberals tweeting je suis JUIF today were solidly behind Hamas - an organisation that wants Israel wiped off the map - just a few months ago.
Apparently not.
More interestingly
It would be the same if White Christians were the growing minority too, Iand I expect in 2115 there will be tensions between minority White Christian immigrants to India & the Middle East etc as the world economy moves
Maybe China too although they are becoming more Christian I believe
If what is happening in France today is a portent of what will happen in the UK tomorrow we will need rather more coppers, armed ones, too.
There was some pretty distasteful commentary along those lines after the shooting of Jewish children in Toulouse a few years back.
Interesting to note that therefore in their eyes, Jews are not civilians. Which presumably makes them combatants. Which is a pretty sobering not to say worrying thought for Jews worldwide.
I think it's at war with a culture that basically does not have the spirit of liberty and the spirit of intellectual inquiry. So you can come up with the most devastating, witty, trenchant argument, and the other fellow is just going to reach for the scimitar and slice your head off. And that calls into question, I think it does call into question as to whether Europe, in allowing Islam to nest within Western pluralistic democracies, has actually placed an existential question over its future. That's a real question for France today.