"The chance of 2 people in a group having the same birthday is obviously much higher than 2 people in the same group having the same day (and year) of birth"
Yes but there are still 366 possible birthdays
But that's the point, in a way. It's not as if it matters WHICH day of the year it is. And If you have n people in the party, you have n tries at matching them up.
So for party member 1, if you have 10 other folk, you have ten goes - very roughly 1/36 odds (it gets more complex as n becomes higher obviously).
But then if you don't win you have another go, for party member 2, with 9 tries (9 because you have already compared member 1 with member 2, and not got a hit).
And so on ... so something like 1/36 x 10 x 1/2 (the 1/2 because of the last effect) - which gives something of the order of 1/7 just for 11 people.
This is far too simple and ignores the overlap effect of double hits as n becomes higher. But you get the idea. You need to deal with factorials and summed series to do it properly. But that's O level/GCSE maths.
Eh, no you don't. You simply need to realise that P(something happens) = 1 - P(something doesn't happen) and it's trivially easy to work out the probability that everyone in a room has a different birthday.
I still think that after 5 years of deep cuts, following 13 years of the magic money tree, level pegging is quite remarkable.
Deep cuts my ass. They haven't cut anything, reduced the rate of increase in spending might be a more realistic description. Healey cut double in one year in 1974 what Osborne has cut this whole parliament.
Take out interest payments, then take out protected spending (NHS being the largest) and the cuts to the remaining national services, and to local authority budgets, have been deep.
The axe hasn't fallen equally, but where it's landed, it's hurt.
27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
24% disagreed with the statement, "acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified"
Overall that survey is not really like the BBC headline. A significant percentage have views that are at odds with what the majority of society and at the same time they feel discrimination / predjuice against them, not exactly happy families.
Yes, the apparent level of support for, or at least sympathy with, violence is staggeringly high - the exact opposite of the spin the Beeb were trying to put on the figures. With that level of extremism apparently rife, we seem to have a very major problem indeed.
Wouldn't we need to see comparative polling first before we could make a call?
I am sure that the figures would not be so high, but I wonder what scores we would get if the question were something like:
"Acts of violence against those who deface the Union Jack can never be justified."
Or if, say, people were asked whether they had any sympathy for the motives that may lie behind an attack on a hypothetical media hate figure - an outspoken proponent of sharia law, perhaps, or looking back a few years an apologist for the IRA
Taking all this into account there are three possibilities at the GE..A Labour majority (great value) Labour most seats (good value) Tory most seats but way short of a majority and unable to stay in office....All three mean its definitely going to be Red Ed as our PM basking in the adulation of the masses on Downing Street in May
27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
24% disagreed with the statement, "acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified"
Overall that survey is not really like the BBC headline. A significant percentage have views that are at odds with what the majority of society and at the same time they feel discrimination / predjuice against them, not exactly happy families.
Yes, the apparent level of support for, or at least sympathy with, violence is staggeringly high - the exact opposite of the spin the Beeb were trying to put on the figures. With that level of extremism apparently rife, we seem to have a very major problem indeed.
Wouldn't we need to see comparative polling first before we could make a call?
I am sure that the figures would not be so high, but I wonder what scores we would get if the question were something like:
"Acts of violence against those who deface the Union Jack can never be justified."
Or if, say, people were asked whether they had any sympathy for the motives that may lie behind an attack on a hypothetical media hate figure - an outspoken proponent of sharia law, perhaps, or looking back a few years an apologist for the IRA
I would say 'why introduce this wholly foreseeable problem?'
Talking about suspicious, Survation have deleted their tweet from last week, which said they would be publishing their Lib Dem polls this week
I take that to mean that whilst a small proportion of the polling showed them to be er, "competitive" in some seats, in the rest they were being pounded like a dockside hooker when the fleet hits town. And those candidates weren't exactly delighted at that being put out there...to have their opponents use their own polling on literature against them.
Let's hope the Polish authorities see sense and decide to extradite Polanski to the US.
That's a good idea. We can imprison all the talented and creative people and fill the world with estate agents
Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people?
It's no wonder media figures such as Saville got away with it for decades, when the Roger's of their world think that it's acceptable for a child molesting director to escape prosecution.
I still think that after 5 years of deep cuts, following 13 years of the magic money tree, level pegging is quite remarkable.
Deep cuts my ass. They haven't cut anything, reduced the rate of increase in spending might be a more realistic description. Healey cut double in one year in 1974 what Osborne has cut this whole parliament.
Take out interest payments, then take out protected spending (NHS being the largest) and the cuts to the remaining national services, and to local authority budgets, have been deep.
The axe hasn't fallen equally, but where it's landed, it's hurt.
And yet
Total Public Spending in 2015 = £731.4bn (of which £64.338bn is interest) Total Public Spending in 2014 = £714.0bn (of which £63.912bn is interest)
So if you remove interest
2015 - £667.06bn 2014 - £650.08bn
We are spending more... even allowing for inflation we are spending more... if we are cutting hard in some areas we are clearly substantially increasing spending in others, the net effect is, we are not making any cuts, we are just reducing the rate of increase, as per my original assertion.
I still think that after 5 years of deep cuts, following 13 years of the magic money tree, level pegging is quite remarkable.
Deep cuts my ass. They haven't cut anything, reduced the rate of increase in spending might be a more realistic description. Healey cut double in one year in 1974 what Osborne has cut this whole parliament.
Individual budgets most certainly have been slashed. The overall level of spend may be as you describe, but to ignore the real spending cuts that have happened is one reason why the Tories are seen as out of touch.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Labour party sources in Bradford, Yorkshire, England question candidate because "She not even Kashmiri, let alone Pakistani" (she is Somali), and much of the population thinks it's OK to kill people for drawing Mohamed.
We are now incorporating a live price box from SPIN of the Commons seats prices.
SPIN is the official sponsor of PB general election coverage
SPIN rocks! The only leading bookmaker never to have closed one of my accounts.
Respect gents.
They must be hoping they get enough mug business on sport out of it to justify having to deal with rats picking them off every time a poll is published
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Labour party sources in Bradford, Yorkshire, England question candidate because "She not even Kashmiri, let alone Pakistani" (she is Somali), and much of the population thinks it's OK to kill people for drawing Mohamed.
What was that nutter Enoch worried about?
Very interesting story brewing....A Tower Hamlets Councillor and former Beeboid / friend of Oona King wins over local candidates and then it all blows up after 3 days.
Totally agree, Pulpy and I have been backing George for a while
OK, I give in, I've neutralised my pro-Labour position for a max £10 loss.
What are they playing at?
Don't be too despondent, George has managed to alienate most of Respect.
Yes I know, that's why I backed Labour in the first place. Now they seem to be doing their utmost to pluck defeat from the jaws of victory. Time to get out - I've been burnt before by Gorgeous George!
Labour party sources in Bradford, Yorkshire, England question candidate because "She not even Kashmiri, let alone Pakistani" (she is Somali), and much of the population thinks it's OK to kill people for drawing Mohamed.
What was that nutter Enoch worried about?
What an idiot he must have been to query whether mass immigration would lead to segregation and a lack of social cohesion. He even said some of the people would be english by birth but remain foreigners in their hearts... The cad
We are now incorporating a live price box from SPIN of the Commons seats prices.
SPIN is the official sponsor of PB general election coverage
SPIN rocks! The only leading bookmaker never to have closed one of my accounts.
Respect gents.
They must be hoping they get enough mug business on sport out of it to justify having to deal with rats picking them off every time a poll is published
They're still laughing about some of my cricket picks from last year.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Halfway through a course on Islam in the Modern Word at the moment. The speaker, a prominent member of the Muslim community and former jihadist, consistently tells us that he and his co-religionists have come to settle in UK, so he and they should act as Brits. Yes he “got it wrong” earlier in his life, but further study of the Qu’ran and other texts has convinced him of the error of his former ways.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
Again, how would that compare to non-Moslems? There are many British laws that many non-Moslem British people may not believe should always be obeyed. I wonder how many driving-related offences are committed each year, for example. Anyone speeding is not obeying a British law, so clearly does not believe in obeying all British laws.
"Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people?"
Not exactly but I think people should be judged by their peers. The thought of twelve 'Jessops' sitting in judgement on someone who actually brings something to this great party fills me with horror.
(obviously I'm taking into account the ludicrous nature of the charge)
@Isam "He even said some of the people would be english by birth but remain foreigners in their hearts..." Yes, one of them is up in front of the select committee today.
Totally agree, Pulpy and I have been backing George for a while
OK, I give in, I've neutralised my pro-Labour position for a max £10 loss.
What are they playing at?
Don't be too despondent, George has managed to alienate most of Respect.
Yes I know, that's why I backed Labour in the first place. Now they seem to be doing their utmost to pluck defeat from the jaws of victory. Time to get out - I've been burnt before by Gorgeous George!
In previous GEs it would have not made much of a change in terms of final result. In current SLAB situation, well
Thanks Andrea. I was on the SNP here already but I've topped up after reading that.
But IS Labour SO broken backed in Scotland? Will it be as bad on the night as is suggested? Of course it deserves to be - it may be that its support has relied too much on the extreme leftism tendency in Scotland which now feels betrayed. But is that enough to see it perform so badly so suddenly in Scotland? And more importantly - are we really going to see Labour collapse so spectacularly in Scotland yet at the same time perform wonderfully in England where the result would inevitably mean them ceding influence over English only matters to SNP MPs??
Not 'so suddenly' perhaps - you are possibly forgetting the Holyrood election results. One interpretation is that the Westminster voting intention, hitherto highly tactical, is reverting to the underlying wishes as seen at Holyrood. Especially as the SNP look like breaking through the FPTP barrier anyway.
As for ceding influence, (a) it's a problem for Labour and LD MPs right now, so don't feel you have to blame the SNP (who have behaved much better), and (b) 'English only' is an absurdity in the current constitutional setup when Westminster runs "the bits without Scotland, Wales, NI and Mann" as well as the UK.
It is quite brave to predict majorities to 2 decimal places 3 months before the election. I'm curious how they calculate some of these individual seat swings.
For example, they have Lab overturning an 11% majority in Peterborough but not overturning a 2% majority in Morecambe and Lunesdale. I wondered if it might be taking account of Ashcroft individual seat polling but Ashcroft showed Labour narrowly ahead in Morecambe in 2 polls. I suppose it may also think UKIP is more of a factor in Peterborough.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Halfway through a course on Islam in the Modern Word at the moment. The speaker, a prominent member of the Muslim community and former jihadist, consistently tells us that he and his co-religionists have come to settle in UK, so he and they should act as Brits. Yes he “got it wrong” earlier in his life, but further study of the Qu’ran and other texts has convinced him of the error of his former ways.
When you have time, OKC, you must read Kissinger's World Order.
It has much to say on this subject and is a wonderful read anyway.
Mr. Observer, comparing breaking a speed limit with machine-gunning cartoonists to death is not a precise and balanced comparison.
Exactly. So why assume that when 7% of Moslems state that they should not have to obey all British laws what they mean is that they should be allowed to machine gun cartoonists?
As well as the polling work Survation conducts under our own name frequently featured in the media, our company, like most other members of the British Polling Council (BPC), also provide “field and tab” services for our customers. A “field and tab” research vendor will typically not be responsible for drafting a questionnaire or assisting on high-level sampling design discussions.
Likewise, after the data has been collected and tabulated, a “field and tab” provider will typically not interpret the resulting data nor prepare a deck of presentation slides. These responsibilities fall on the client (the research buyer) or on a consultant that the client may hire.
In reference to polls conducted for the Liberal Democrats, which have been described in the Guardian, New Statesman and others as “private polling conducted by Survation”, we would like to clarify that the role of Survation in these polls was that of “field and tab” only.
Survation were not responsible for drafting the questionnaires used, sampling design discussions or analysis of the results. These polls should therefore not properly be described as “Survation polls”. As a consequence, Survation is not responsible for the publication of these polls under BPC rules. Any member of the public with queries regarding the detail or further information about the mentioned polling work should be directed to the Liberal Democrats.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
It's the other 93% you should be worrying about. The idea that people are always going to obey the law, however bad, is absolutely terrifying.
That said, they probably don't mean it - they're probably just picking up the "should Muslims disobey British laws in a special Muslimmy way involving big beards and using the word Infidel a lot" subtext and responding to that.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Do you obey every British law?
I don't recall the question saying "EVERY law", you added that to slide the debate into an area in which you feel more comfortable.
Mr. Observer, comparing breaking a speed limit with machine-gunning cartoonists to death is not a precise and balanced comparison.
Exactly. So why assume that when 7% of Moslems state that they should not have to obey all British laws what they mean is that they should be allowed to machine gun cartoonists?
A few more years of Blair, Blunkett and Straw and machine gunning cartoonists would have been an obligatory element of National Service.
Mr. Observer, comparing breaking a speed limit with machine-gunning cartoonists to death is not a precise and balanced comparison.
Exactly. So why assume that when 7% of Moslems state that they should not have to obey all British laws what they mean is that they should be allowed to machine gun cartoonists?
As well as the polling work Survation conducts under our own name frequently featured in the media, our company, like most other members of the British Polling Council (BPC), also provide “field and tab” services for our customers. A “field and tab” research vendor will typically not be responsible for drafting a questionnaire or assisting on high-level sampling design discussions.
Likewise, after the data has been collected and tabulated, a “field and tab” provider will typically not interpret the resulting data nor prepare a deck of presentation slides. These responsibilities fall on the client (the research buyer) or on a consultant that the client may hire.
In reference to polls conducted for the Liberal Democrats, which have been described in the Guardian, New Statesman and others as “private polling conducted by Survation”, we would like to clarify that the role of Survation in these polls was that of “field and tab” only.
Survation were not responsible for drafting the questionnaires used, sampling design discussions or analysis of the results. These polls should therefore not properly be described as “Survation polls”. As a consequence, Survation is not responsible for the publication of these polls under BPC rules. Any member of the public with queries regarding the detail or further information about the mentioned polling work should be directed to the Liberal Democrats.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Do you obey every British law?
I don't recall the question saying "EVERY law", you added that to slide the debate into an area in which you feel more comfortable.
You are right, the question was about ALWAYS obeying British law.
LOL, SO concentrating on "obey the law" question....only a total moron would answer "yes I would break the law" to a survey question, especially if you also think you that the authorities are prejudice against you. What it shows are that 7% are morons.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Do you obey every British law?
I don't recall the question saying "EVERY law", you added that to slide the debate into an area in which you feel more comfortable.
You are right, the question was about ALWAYS obeying British law.
27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
24% disagreed with the statement, "acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified"
Overall that survey is not really like the BBC headline. A significant percentage have views that are at odds with what the majority of society and at the same time they feel discrimination / predjuice against them, not exactly happy families.
Yes, the apparent level of support for, or at least sympathy with, violence is staggeringly high - the exact opposite of the spin the Beeb were trying to put on the figures. With that level of extremism apparently rife, we seem to have a very major problem indeed.
The BBC this morning were definitely protesting too much.
I still think that after 5 years of deep cuts, following 13 years of the magic money tree, level pegging is quite remarkable.
Deep cuts my ass. They haven't cut anything, reduced the rate of increase in spending might be a more realistic description. Healey cut double in one year in 1974 what Osborne has cut this whole parliament.
Healey increased Corporation Tax to 52%. He brought in an extra tax band and increased the basic rate to 33%. Thats 1974. Healey went to the IMF in 1976. In fact the Treasury had vastly overstated the size of the problem. Spending continued on its merry way thereafter.
The problem we face now is not the issue of the pace of the cuts which are significant, but the vast rate of spending increases under Labours last 10 years. We have got through over 55% of the necessary cuts. The problem with a cut is you have to continue with it whilst you make further cuts.
"Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people?"
Not exactly but I think people should be judged by their peers. The thought of twelve 'Jessops' sitting in judgement on someone who actually brings something to this great party fills me with horror.
(obviously I'm taking into account the ludicrous nature of the charge)
If I did what Polanski did I'd be facing about 8 years inside (as well as being struck off).
LOL, SO concentrating on "obey the law" question....only a total moron would answer "yes I would break the law" to a survey question, especially if you also think you that the authorities are prejudice against you. What it shows are that 7% are morons.
Nope, I am answering points raised.
My original point was:
Wouldn't we need to see comparative polling first before we could make a call?
I am sure that the figures would not be so high, but I wonder what scores we would get if the question were something like:
"Acts of violence against those who deface the Union Jack can never be justified."
Or if, say, people were asked whether they had any sympathy for the motives that may lie behind an attack on a hypothetical media hate figure - an outspoken proponent of sharia law, perhaps, or looking back a few years an apologist for the IRA
Followed by:
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Had a further play around and found some oddities. They have Boston and Skegness down as Con coming 1st and Labour 2nd. They have a "Peak UKIP" scenario and they still don't have UKIP taking Boston even on 28% of the national vote
Interestingly in the "Peak UKIP" scenario they have UKIP gaining 35 seats including Bath, Twickenham, Sheffield Hallam and Ceredigion!!!
LOL, SO concentrating on "obey the law" question....only a total moron would answer "yes I would break the law" to a survey question, especially if you also think you that the authorities are prejudice against you. What it shows are that 7% are morons.
People who read my posts will know that I'm generally distrustful of authority and unimpressed by the current or previous government's record on free speech and civil liberties, but even I wouldn't have assumed that the authorities were secretly using Comres to police thought crimes.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
7% x 2.7m = 189,000 Muslim people in Britain don't believe Muslim people in Britain should always obey British laws.
What we are seeing is the same thought process that said in 2004
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
Indeed. The hoop jumping our liberal and especially liberal left friends exhibit in order to say in effect "nothing to see here, move along" is almost toe curling in its embarrassment.
Do you obey every British law?
I don't recall the question saying "EVERY law", you added that to slide the debate into an area in which you feel more comfortable.
You are right, the question was about ALWAYS obeying British law.
So, do you always obey British law?
Every single one, how about you ?
Nope, I drive over the speed limit every now and again. I have also taken some soft drugs a few times in my past. There's probably other stuff too.
We're never going to see this selective batch of Lib Dem competitive polls then.. I wanted to see how much of a difference naming the candidates caused and what the state of play was in Leeds North West.
27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
24% disagreed with the statement, "acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified"
Overall that survey is not really like the BBC headline. A significant percentage have views that are at odds with what the majority of society and at the same time they feel discrimination / predjuice against them, not exactly happy families.
Yes, the apparent level of support for, or at least sympathy with, violence is staggeringly high - the exact opposite of the spin the Beeb were trying to put on the figures. With that level of extremism apparently rife, we seem to have a very major problem indeed.
The BBC this morning were definitely protesting too much.
I still think that after 5 years of deep cuts, following 13 years of the magic money tree, level pegging is quite remarkable.
Deep cuts my ass. They haven't cut anything, reduced the rate of increase in spending might be a more realistic description. Healey cut double in one year in 1974 what Osborne has cut this whole parliament.
Healey increased Corporation Tax to 52%. He brought in an extra tax band and increased the basic rate to 33%. Thats 1974. Healey went to the IMF in 1976. In fact the Treasury had vastly overstated the size of the problem. Spending continued on its merry way thereafter.
The problem we face now is not the issue of the pace of the cuts which are significant, but the vast rate of spending increases under Labours last 10 years. We have got through over 55% of the necessary cuts. The problem with a cut is you have to continue with it whilst you make further cuts.
The problem is for what are seen as electoral reasons we continue to ring fence things that we shouldn't and we perpetuate this bollocks that you can only improve healthcare by throwing money at it. This latter point is about to be tested to destruction under whoever is lucky enough to be government next, since a recent report showed the NHS is going to need an extra £30bn per year just to stand still by 2020 - the equivalent of 5% on the basic rate of income tax.
Cameron's examples were odd, how many MPs are running shops, small businesses. There are MPs who are still at The Bar, but in many ways it was excruciating stuff. But is the no second jobs an excuse for pushing up the wages of MPs?
He clearly said no to Eds one eyed on the hoof policy wheeze.
And here in lies the problem.
Ed had the better sound-bites, and if all you know about politics is at this superficial level, then you would have heard Ed offer a deal to "clean-up politics" and Dave say no, because reasons. = Ed won.
But... If you look beyond the superficial then you fin...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Once again I have to declare that there were no winners at PMQs. We all lost.
What a shower
Its because all parties have anchors around their feet, be it big business or big unions, and nobody can claim be a member of "whiter than white" party and not have the public laugh at them.
Cameron's examples were odd, how many MPs are running shops, small businesses. There are MPs who are still at The Bar, but in many ways it was excruciating stuff. But is the no second jobs an excuse for pushing up the wages of MPs?
Exactly..
Wife and I had a similar conversation last night. I say fine, ban 2nd jobs but hike up salary by x2 (or more).
Cameron's examples were odd, how many MPs are running shops, small businesses. There are MPs who are still at The Bar, but in many ways it was excruciating stuff. But is the no second jobs an excuse for pushing up the wages of MPs?
It's a nonsense - MPs can do what they want in their other time. If they don't do a good job they get voted out. As long as no buying influence then they should be allowed to work. Ed just hates business.
You are right, the question was about ALWAYS obeying British law.
So, do you always obey British law?
Every single one, how about you ?
How on earth could you know that? Just British tax legislation is far too long and complicated for anyone to know if they're in compliance with it.
See this famous video. This is about US law, but UK law is no different, especially when you include the EU dimension. Start at 5:20 and watch at least until he gets to the bit about possessing a fish. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=320
Mr. Observer, comparing breaking a speed limit with machine-gunning cartoonists to death is not a precise and balanced comparison.
Exactly. So why assume that when 7% of Moslems state that they should not have to obey all British laws what they mean is that they should be allowed to machine gun cartoonists?
A few more years of Blair, Blunkett and Straw and machine gunning cartoonists would have been an obligatory element of National Service.
Be fair, Blunkett would only have wanted to machine gun the cartoonists they'd put in prison first.
@TGOHF Trade union funding evil, hedge fund money, above reproach?
Care to list the hedge fund doners who are supposed to be bankrolling the Conservatives? I had a look at the list of main donors, and amongst them there seems to be just one individual who has made his money from a hedge fund.
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
Halfway through a course on Islam in the Modern Word at the moment. The speaker, a prominent member of the Muslim community and former jihadist, consistently tells us that he and his co-religionists have come to settle in UK, so he and they should act as Brits. Yes he “got it wrong” earlier in his life, but further study of the Qu’ran and other texts has convinced him of the error of his former ways.
When you have time, OKC, you must read Kissinger's World Order.
It has much to say on this subject and is a wonderful read anyway.
Thanks for the heads up. Interestingly the Guardian had a sympathetic review followed by a pretty universilly condemnatory CiF afterwards.
"Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people?"
Not exactly but I think people should be judged by their peers. The thought of twelve 'Jessops' sitting in judgement on someone who actually brings something to this great party fills me with horror.
(obviously I'm taking into account the ludicrous nature of the charge)
Ah, I love you too, Roger.
If you ever committed a crime, I wonder if we could finds twelve slugs to act as your peers?
Comments
http://news.sky.com/story/1433971/labour-candidate-steps-down-after-72-hours
The axe hasn't fallen equally, but where it's landed, it's hurt.
Let's hope the Polish authorities see sense and decide to extradite Polanski to the US.
That's a good idea. We can imprison all the talented and creative people and fill the world with estate agents
Respect gents.
I am sure that the figures would not be so high, but I wonder what scores we would get if the question were something like:
"Acts of violence against those who deface the Union Jack can never be justified."
Or if, say, people were asked whether they had any sympathy for the motives that may lie behind an attack on a hypothetical media hate figure - an outspoken proponent of sharia law, perhaps, or looking back a few years an apologist for the IRA
If so, that causes Survation some issues...
"Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people? "
They are already, look at the HMRC figures for prosecutions over the "Swiss leaks"?
Not surprising at all actually...
Or were the Lib Dems just making shit up?
Very droll, Roger, but surely you mean "necklacing"? Or has your hero-worship of that pious old fraud Mandela dimmed with thime?
I'd rest on your 'train' gag. That was seriously funny!
Total Public Spending in 2015 = £731.4bn (of which £64.338bn is interest)
Total Public Spending in 2014 = £714.0bn (of which £63.912bn is interest)
So if you remove interest
2015 - £667.06bn
2014 - £650.08bn
We are spending more... even allowing for inflation we are spending more... if we are cutting hard in some areas we are clearly substantially increasing spending in others, the net effect is, we are not making any cuts, we are just reducing the rate of increase, as per my original assertion.
I'll settle for just imprisoning all the people who have sex with children. Fair compromise?
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31293196
Oh, I don't know?
Both involve the innocent and powerless getting sh*fted?
Labour party sources in Bradford, Yorkshire, England question candidate because "She not even Kashmiri, let alone Pakistani" (she is Somali), and much of the population thinks it's OK to kill people for drawing Mohamed.
What was that nutter Enoch worried about?
What are they playing at?
If that's ok by Mr PBm.
I am cut to the bone by your repartee.
Yes he “got it wrong” earlier in his life, but further study of the Qu’ran and other texts has convinced him of the error of his former ways.
"Are you saying that 'creative types' should be held to a different level of justice than other people?"
Not exactly but I think people should be judged by their peers. The thought of twelve 'Jessops' sitting in judgement on someone who actually brings something to this great party fills me with horror.
(obviously I'm taking into account the ludicrous nature of the charge)
"He even said some of the people would be english by birth but remain foreigners in their hearts..."
Yes, one of them is up in front of the select committee today.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/bermondsey-and-southwark/winning-party
As for ceding influence, (a) it's a problem for Labour and LD MPs right now, so don't feel you have to blame the SNP (who have behaved much better), and (b) 'English only' is an absurdity in the current constitutional setup when Westminster runs "the bits without Scotland, Wales, NI and Mann" as well as the UK.
For example, they have Lab overturning an 11% majority in Peterborough but not overturning a 2% majority in Morecambe and Lunesdale. I wondered if it might be taking account of Ashcroft individual seat polling but Ashcroft showed Labour narrowly ahead in Morecambe in 2 polls. I suppose it may also think UKIP is more of a factor in Peterborough.
There will be only 13,000 eastern european immigrants coming here after the borders are opened
And when a million or do had arrived in 2010..
'Oh but they're such hard workers'
Get it wrong, lie, then lie some more
As per the link oblitus sum me provided yesterday, most people act like lawyers intent on covering up their instinctive prejudices rather than dealing with the truth
It has much to say on this subject and is a wonderful read anyway.
Likewise, after the data has been collected and tabulated, a “field and tab” provider will typically not interpret the resulting data nor prepare a deck of presentation slides. These responsibilities fall on the client (the research buyer) or on a consultant that the client may hire.
In reference to polls conducted for the Liberal Democrats, which have been described in the Guardian, New Statesman and others as “private polling conducted by Survation”, we would like to clarify that the role of Survation in these polls was that of “field and tab” only.
Survation were not responsible for drafting the questionnaires used, sampling design discussions or analysis of the results. These polls should therefore not properly be described as “Survation polls”. As a consequence, Survation is not responsible for the publication of these polls under BPC rules. Any member of the public with queries regarding the detail or further information about the mentioned polling work should be directed to the Liberal Democrats.
http://survation.com/in-reference-to-recent-liberal-democrat-polling-shared-privately-with-the-media/
That said, they probably don't mean it - they're probably just picking up the "should Muslims disobey British laws in a special Muslimmy way involving big beards and using the word Infidel a lot" subtext and responding to that.
Dave, plays a straight bat.
Dave point out trade union allowed versus shop owner banned
Ed offers to ban trade union
Dave point out further problems
zzzzzzzzzz
So, do you always obey British law?
He must know that Labour is so messed up and Red Tory that virtually no attack on the Tories will not be an attack on his own party?
Healey went to the IMF in 1976. In fact the Treasury had vastly overstated the size of the problem. Spending continued on its merry way thereafter.
The problem we face now is not the issue of the pace of the cuts which are significant, but the vast rate of spending increases under Labours last 10 years. We have got through over 55% of the necessary cuts. The problem with a cut is you have to continue with it whilst you make further cuts.
My original point was:
Wouldn't we need to see comparative polling first before we could make a call?
I am sure that the figures would not be so high, but I wonder what scores we would get if the question were something like:
"Acts of violence against those who deface the Union Jack can never be justified."
Or if, say, people were asked whether they had any sympathy for the motives that may lie behind an attack on a hypothetical media hate figure - an outspoken proponent of sharia law, perhaps, or looking back a few years an apologist for the IRA
Followed by:
Having read the online BBC report of the Moslem survey it looks pretty balanced to me. It leads on the majority opposing violence, but in the third paragraph - six lines in - states:
But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks.
Tucked away at the bottom we find:
Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31293196
or not?
Interestingly in the "Peak UKIP" scenario they have UKIP gaining 35 seats including Bath, Twickenham, Sheffield Hallam and Ceredigion!!!
We all lost.
What a shower
Ed had the better sound-bites, and if all you know about politics is at this superficial level, then you would have heard Ed offer a deal to "clean-up politics" and Dave say no, because reasons.
= Ed won.
But... If you look beyond the superficial then you fin...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Trade union funding evil, hedge fund money, above reproach?
You are George Orwell, and I claim my five spacebucks!
Wife and I had a similar conversation last night.
I say fine, ban 2nd jobs but hike up salary by x2 (or more).
See this famous video. This is about US law, but UK law is no different, especially when you include the EU dimension. Start at 5:20 and watch at least until he gets to the bit about possessing a fish.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=320
That question has to be almost the ultimate for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_desirability_bias, only the terminally stupid or epically sociopathic are going to say yes, irrespective of their beliefs
If you ever committed a crime, I wonder if we could finds twelve slugs to act as your peers?