Lol, I suppose it's a step on from not inhaling. If you can remember the frenzied, wild, bohemian decade of 1970s Glasgow housing schemes, you weren't there.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
An interesting question. I could see the sense of going private in boroughs where the State schools are poor, but I can't see the point of beggaring yourself where the schools are good.
Completely agree - we are weighing up state vs. private at the moment.
But the point was that SO's sweeping assertion that state schools, like for like, outperform private schools is not borne out by the fact that people are prepared to beggar themselves for private education: on the assumption they are rational, then they must perceive advantage in the investment
It's not my assertion. It's what PISA states. The PISA stats are constantly used as evidence that the state school system has gone to the dogs, but what they also show is that on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools. Clearly there are significant advantages to a private school education - your children will be taught in smaller class sizes, the facilities they enjoy will be second to none, the children they mix with will be far less likely to have damaging problems at home that they bring to the classroom, and so on; but judged on results, private schools do not deliver what they should.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
See the Energy Companies share values have fallen today following Ed Miliband's latest ideas on forcing price reductions. There must be a danger that they review their investment decisions into UK energy and hold off vital decisions on energy.
1. A Nespresso coffee machine: unless George Clooney promises to turn up in my kitchen, make the bloody coffee and bring it to me in bed, not a must have at all. A small espresso machine of the type found in every Italian household is all that's needed. 2. One blender: have that. 3. A mini-chopper: I have some sharp knives. 4. What the hell is a Kenwood Chef Titanium?
My must haves: a cheese grater and a potato masher. A good vegetable peeler and good quality knives. A kettle. A steamer. Good quality pans. That's about it.
I'd add measuring cups, a set of scales and a baking tray
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Mr. Song, those comparisons are madder than a box of frogs.
We know the Earth can (and has) warm and cool naturally. Saying 'the Earth is warming' proves nothing (even if true, temperatures appear to have plateaued, though it's worth noting revisions almost always seem upward).
The case has not been proven.
I'm amused at the way it's transformed from 'global warming' to 'climate change', as if the climate would otherwise naturally be in some kind of steady state, a perpetual stasis that has been wrecked by man's industrial activity.
The climate has never, ever been like that. We've had ice ages and hot periods and all manner of tumult and change throughout the planet's history.
A changing climate isn't some catastrophe - it's the normal state of affairs.
It would be nice if the climate continues to be such that it can support the billions of people alive on this planet in the places they currently live. So it would be better if the climate did not change too much too quickly and we humans can help that to be the case by for example wasting less fossil fuel. The comparisons are valid in as much as we may well have been arguing about whether smoking was harmful in the 50s/60s. Then we had rival scientists (some sponsored by industry) disputing it. The MMR controversy happened more recently.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
As a cultured man, I'm sure you'll have read 'Wind in the Willows'. If I may refine your analogy of adults and children (or vulnerable adults if you like) ... I'd call it Ratty and Mole vs the Weasels and Stoats in the Wild wood. Not sure who Badger is though.
It's disappointing that you chuckle tolerantly at a man who advocates dismantling the race discrimination legislation and then directly lies about it when challenged.
I wish we didn't need race discrimination legislation. In the same way that I wish state schools were good enough that there was no demand for private education. I fear we have some way to travel until we reach Utopia.
On a like for like basis, our state schools significantly outperform private ones:
And yet demand for private schools continues to grow. I don't believe that, outside of a small group of schools (and individuals) there is much 'snob' value in a private education.
So why are parents prepared to pay through the nose for it?
An interesting question. I could see the sense of going private in boroughs where the State schools are poor, but I can't see the point of beggaring yourself where the schools are good.
But one barrister friend put it to me (and rather shocked me) by saying "I don't want my children mixing with scum."
Private healthcare, on the other hand, is worth its weight in gold. It saved my mother's life when she was diagnosed with cancer, and got operated on within 12 days of the diagnosis.
Delighted about your mother, but the NHS is pretty good at cancer - you'd need to see the evidence that they would have provided a worse outcome
Scanning back through thread ..... really should find something better to do ... once diagnosed with cancer .... delay due to GP making an "alternative diagnosis" .... I couldn't keep up with the speed with which I was treated. Five weeks from "I'm sorry, you've a growth up there" to coming home with instructions to walk about to keep get the muscles moving!" Could actually have been quicker!
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
The wise one misunderstands again
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
Mr. Song, it'd be nice if my bank balance were a thousand times larger, and I opened my bedroom door to find Jennifer Morrison and Olivia Wilde pillow-fighting over which one of them gets to sleep with me.
Science isn't about niceness, or nastiness, it's about reality.
I could just as easily claim that the Church's teaching centuries ago about the Earth being the centre of the universe was believed by many but disproved by science, as climate change will be.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
The wise one misunderstands again
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
I'm sure racists do that anyway, but you have misunderstood
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
The wise one misunderstands again
Farage: Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour? No.
iSam: Farage isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act.
Mr. Song, it'd be nice if my bank balance were a thousand times larger, and I opened my bedroom door to find Jennifer Morrison and Olivia Wilde pillow-fighting over which one of them gets to sleep with me.
Science isn't about niceness, or nastiness, it's about reality.
I could just as easily claim that the Church's teaching centuries ago about the Earth being the centre of the universe was believed by many but disproved by science, as climate change will be.
Mr. Song, it'd be nice if my bank balance were a thousand times larger, and I opened my bedroom door to find Jennifer Morrison and Olivia Wilde pillow-fighting over which one of them gets to sleep with me.
I am sure you would do the gentlemanly thing - and sleep with both.
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
I'm sure racists do that anyway, but you have misunderstood
I understand only too clearly that UKIP crossed a Rubicon yesterday. Dan Hodges put it well yesterday. Still, at least no one now has any excuse after May that they didn't know what they were voting for if they vote UKIP.
Er, there is actually a campaign to get more men to train a primary teachers. Idea, in part, is to ensure that boys in particular have a male role model, especially given the increasing number of one (female) parent families.
Also - young boys (8 or under especially) think differently from young girls - much more perceptual/ picture orientated rather than language orientated. This has major implications - two thirds of boys are below average and two thirds of girls are above average.
1. A Nespresso coffee machine: unless George Clooney promises to turn up in my kitchen, make the bloody coffee and bring it to me in bed, not a must have at all. A small espresso machine of the type found in every Italian household is all that's needed. 2. One blender: have that. 3. A mini-chopper: I have some sharp knives. 4. What the hell is a Kenwood Chef Titanium?
My must haves: a cheese grater and a potato masher. A good vegetable peeler and good quality knives. A kettle. A steamer. Good quality pans. That's about it.
I'd add measuring cups, a set of scales and a baking tray
I'm amused at the way it's transformed from 'global warming' to 'climate change', as if the climate would otherwise naturally be in some kind of steady state, a perpetual stasis that has been wrecked by man's industrial activity.
They were sick of people going "It's snowing outside - so much for that that global warming hurff durff." So they chose climate change instead.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
Do tell where is "UKIP Land"?
It seems to me that in large part what Phillips and Farage were doing in that section was speculating about a society under a UKIP government. Now only the most unrealistic of UKIP supporters would claim that is going to happen anytime soon. So it seems to me they could well have been talking in ideals. Don't you think it would be nice to aspire to a society that was colour blind where such legislation was unnecessary?.
That is very different to the real world where Farage freely admits that he would change employment law to ensure British nationals were given preference over overseas workers but would not as he repeatedly stated yesterday interfere with race relations legislation currently.
I may be proved wrong should the full context of the discussions with Phillips be broadcast (if C4 don't do a typical hatchet job) and prove he was alluding to the current situation but until it would be hasty to preclude the possibility that they were talking in ideals.
As for the lying charge? I can quote chapter verse on the 'lies' of the last three Prime Ministers two of the last three chancellors and more Ministers than I would like to recall.
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
I'm sure racists do that anyway, but you have misunderstood
I understand only too clearly that UKIP crossed a Rubicon yesterday. Dan Hodges put it well yesterday. Still, at least no one now has any excuse after May that they didn't know what they were voting for if they vote UKIP.
Ah Dan Hodges, the ombudsman of Ukip based disputes.
Like him you have an agenda and you are sticking to it. Self interest.
Why do you publish and link to blogs you say you only write to keep track of your betting thoughts? Would you publish your diary online every time you write an entry?
Mr. Alistair, then perhaps they ought not to have predicted a Mediterranean climate and an end to snow [I don't have the link to the Independent story, but I'm sure someone knows it].
And there's rancid hypocrisy as far as weather not being climate goes. If it's hot, or cold, or stormy, or calm, there's always someone claiming that's 'proof' of anthropogenic global warming.
Mr. Mark, of course. A gentleman wouldn't want either to go unsatisfied.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
Do tell where is "UKIP Land"?
Just left from Bongo-bongo land and straight on til morning....
Mr. F, I agree entirely. It reminds me of Lib Dem idiocy when it comes to reducing the female prison population, despite there being over 20 male prisoners for every one female.
Of course, the most pernicious aspect of such things has been seen by the inaction in Rotherham and elsewhere.
Er, there is actually a campaign to get more men to train a primary teachers. Idea, in part, is to ensure that boys in particular have a male role model, especially given the increasing number of one (female) parent families.
Also - young boys (8 or under especially) think differently from young girls - much more perceptual/ picture orientated rather than language orientated. This has major implications - two thirds of boys are below average and two thirds of girls are above average.
I think I read that first a long time ago, but the author went on to say that by about 12 the boys had caught up and from then on it was neck-and-neck.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
This is an interesting little story from the Guardian. It reports the "elite bastions of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions" have been exempted from the government's counter-terror ban on extremist speakers from university campuses.
It says: "The two prestigious student societies have escaped from the home secretary, Theresa May's counter-terror crackdown on non-violent extremism in higher education after a strong lobby from senior Tory peers."
Home Office ministers confirmed to the newspaper that the two unions have been exempted from the ban.
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
There always seem to be clear spikes towards UKIP when we get stories about PC/paedophilia/muslims/race relations.
I find myself wondering if it's the SNP thing. Cameron's message looks subtle as a brick to the Westminster village, but "Vote Conservative not UKIP because otherwise Labour might ally with the SNP" might actually translate to a few % of voters as "screw it, the Scots are allowed to vote for a party that's openly nationalist and wants to put scots first without being told they are racist isolationists, why can't I do the same?" Name aside, UKIP functions much better as the English National Party than the Conservatives do.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
An interesting question. I could see the sense of going private in boroughs where the State schools are poor, but I can't see the point of beggaring yourself where the schools are good.
Completely agree - we are weighing up state vs. private at the moment.
But the point was that SO's sweeping assertion that state schools, like for like, outperform private schools is not borne out by the fact that people are prepared to beggar themselves for private education: on the assumption they are rational, then they must perceive advantage in the investment
It's not my assertion. It's what PISA states. The PISA stats are constantly used as evidence that the state school system has gone to the dogs, but what they also show is that on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools. Clearly there are significant advantages to a private school education - your children will be taught in smaller class sizes, the facilities they enjoy will be second to none, the children they mix with will be far less likely to have damaging problems at home that they bring to the classroom, and so on; but judged on results, private schools do not deliver what they should.
So there's no reason for left-wing ex-public schoolboys to whip up hatred against them then? Or to want to bias the university admissions system against independent schools, given that they confer no advantage?
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
Maybe Labour wants Ed's resignation to be a surprise....
F1: this is frustrating. The new, bag-of-shit style redesign of the official Formula 1 site is making it difficult to find the qualifying result for Australia 2014. *sighs*
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
Do tell where is "UKIP Land"?
Just left from Bongo-bongo land and straight on til morning....
This is an interesting little story from the Guardian. It reports the "elite bastions of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions" have been exempted from the government's counter-terror ban on extremist speakers from university campuses.
It says: "The two prestigious student societies have escaped from the home secretary, Theresa May's counter-terror crackdown on non-violent extremism in higher education after a strong lobby from senior Tory peers."
Home Office ministers confirmed to the newspaper that the two unions have been exempted from the ban.
Little mention of the other of the top three, Hull.
@Scott_P Very grown up, considering they have twisted everything else to suit their political bias, and excite the more mentally unbalanced section of the voters.
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
Not sure how that makes it grown up. Or is my sarcasm-meter on the blink.
I'm amused at the way it's transformed from 'global warming' to 'climate change', as if the climate would otherwise naturally be in some kind of steady state, a perpetual stasis that has been wrecked by man's industrial activity.
You're amused by something that never happened?
The IPCC was established decades ago, and hasn't changed its name. The acronym for the UN process is something like UNFCC, and is likewise as old as things get in this field. It has been "Climate Change" from the very beginning.
It's just another one of those bullshit denier memes you've picked up from somewhere and repeat on and on and on as if it proves something, when it doesn't prove anything at all, because it isn't true.
Mr. Alistair, then perhaps they ought not to have predicted a Mediterranean climate and an end to snow [I don't have the link to the Independent story, but I'm sure someone knows it].
And there's rancid hypocrisy as far as weather not being climate goes. If it's hot, or cold, or stormy, or calm, there's always someone claiming that's 'proof' of anthropogenic global warming.
Mr. Mark, of course. A gentleman wouldn't want either to go unsatisfied.
Olivia Wilde was born Olivia Cockburn.
Not that that should worry your flame-retardant wiffle-stick.....
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
I'm amazed that anyone is interested in the contents of EdM's forthcoming speech. i can exclusively reveal that it will contain nothing of any worth.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
The wise one misunderstands again
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
God knows I'm no fan of the arse Farage, but what he said and the context in which he said it support constructions other than the one you're putting on it.
For example, suppose he had been asked if there should be laws against witchcraft. He would have said No to that as well. This could be because he thinks witchcraft should be tolerated, but it could also be because he thinks 1/ it does not actually exist and 2/ that having laws that assert otherwise encourages the burning of old ladies who own cats.
AIUI Farage had previously said that he didn't think there was any racism left in this country. You needn't agree with him to follow why he'd then say we don't need the laws.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
Are you as bonkers as Farage? The issue is simple. He clearly said he would repeal the race relations act. No law on discrimination on race or colour. On being pressed about if that was a wise move he clearly confirmed his opinion and said that this law was not needed now.
This excuse for repeal is a farce and a fudge - Farage and UKIP clearly want to appeal to all those who want to take advantage of the repeal of such laws. If you are coloured or foreign in UKIPland you will be discriminated against and have no protection. Next stop the homosexuals. Anyone who is different. UKIP's appeal is stark and blatant.
No, as per usual having blown his 'wink wink nudge nudge say no more' dog whistle as loudly has he can, he rows back 'wot me guv? No its all a fit up.'
If you agree with all that - fine. Just say so. Perhaps Farage will have performed a useful service if at last he is open about where he and UKIP are coming from.
Someone else I know online went to school with her.
Mr. Me, 'denier'? I'm not rejecting a well-established historical genocide, I'm disputing a contentious theory.
As for the IPCC: I have little respect for a supposedly scientific body who got their forecasts entirely wrong and then increased their confidence in their own predictive powers for their next set of forecasts.
The talk a decade or two ago was all about 'global warming', and this has ceased. I shan't bother to check, and instead concede that the IPCC has been in existence for quite some time.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
Not sure I would think having English only staff in fish and chip shops was on so I cannot see why this loophole exists for ethnic restaurants (if it does )
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
I do expect that but have been to one recently in Sussex nr Steyning and the waiting staff were white English though the owners were oriental ... Didn't bother me, just as it doesn't if I go to an English pub and the staff aren't English
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
I know an Indian restaurant manager - he's tried advertising in a general trade journal for chefs of any ethnic group, offering training in the cuisine (he was fed up with the hassle of importing chefs from Bangladesh) but drew an absolute blank - the number of people with experience as chefs who applied was zero. Conversely, when I was briefly unemployed in 1997 and trying out the job centre, the (white) chap at the next desk, who was a young cook, asked if he could get training in Indian cooking to improve his chances. The adviser told him to stop messing about with fancy ideas about more training and just get a job.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
God knows I'm no fan of the arse Farage, but what he said and the context in which he said it support constructions other than the one you're putting on it.
For example, suppose he had been asked if there should be laws against witchcraft. He would have said No to that as well. This could be because he thinks witchcraft should be tolerated, but it could also be because he thinks 1/ it does not actually exist and 2/ that having laws that assert otherwise encourages the burning of old ladies who own cats.
AIUI Farage had previously said that he didn't think there was any racism left in this country. You needn't agree with him to follow why he'd then say we don't need the laws.
Except that it's manifestly untrue. The leader of a party that's only just had to sack a councillor who had a problem with "negroes" because "there's something about their faces" must be aware of that.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
Who cooks it is pretty important.
are you saying that only Chinese or Indian people can cook Chinese or Indian food? Wow
1. A Nespresso coffee machine: unless George Clooney promises to turn up in my kitchen, make the bloody coffee and bring it to me in bed, not a must have at all. A small espresso machine of the type found in every Italian household is all that's needed. 2. One blender: have that. 3. A mini-chopper: I have some sharp knives. 4. What the hell is a Kenwood Chef Titanium?
My must haves: a cheese grater and a potato masher. A good vegetable peeler and good quality knives. A kettle. A steamer. Good quality pans. That's about it.
I'd add measuring cups, a set of scales and a baking tray
My one luxury is a set of copper saucepans.
No strainer/sieve?
(And as a Scot I'd add a girdle for drop scones and oatcakes.)
1. A Nespresso coffee machine: unless George Clooney promises to turn up in my kitchen, make the bloody coffee and bring it to me in bed, not a must have at all. A small espresso machine of the type found in every Italian household is all that's needed. 2. One blender: have that. 3. A mini-chopper: I have some sharp knives. 4. What the hell is a Kenwood Chef Titanium?
My must haves: a cheese grater and a potato masher. A good vegetable peeler and good quality knives. A kettle. A steamer. Good quality pans. That's about it.
I'd add measuring cups, a set of scales and a baking tray
My one luxury is a set of copper saucepans.
No strainer/sieve?
(And as a Scot I'd add a girdle for drop scones and oatcakes.)
"Barr's Gordon-Bru. Made in Scotland from girdles."
I've never even thought about buying the former, but thanks for making me consider it if only to rule it out! And I hate Irn-Bru (and Auchentoshan which I'm convinced, perhaps wrongly, is designed to meet the same palate).
But good jokes all the same - especially the second.
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
@christopherhope: Labour is refusing to brief the @telegraph and other national papers on details of Ed Miliband's speech tomorrow. Very grown up behaviour.
I'm amazed that anyone is interested in the contents of EdM's forthcoming speech. i can exclusively reveal that it will contain nothing of any worth.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
Are you as bonkers as Farage? The issue is simple. He clearly said he would repeal the race relations act. No law on discrimination on race or colour. On being pressed about if that was a wise move he clearly confirmed his opinion and said that this law was not needed now.
This excuse for repeal is a farce and a fudge - Farage and UKIP clearly want to appeal to all those who want to take advantage of the repeal of such laws. If you are coloured or foreign in UKIPland you will be discriminated against and have no protection. Next stop the homosexuals. Anyone who is different. UKIP's appeal is stark and blatant.
No, as per usual having blown his 'wink wink nudge nudge say no more' dog whistle as loudly has he can, he rows back 'wot me guv? No its all a fit up.'
If you agree with all that - fine. Just say so. Perhaps Farage will have performed a useful service if at last he is open about where he and UKIP are coming from.
At various points, I've read publications from the Libertarian Alliance, Adam Smith Institute, and Institute of Economic Affairs, arguing for the repeal of some or all equality laws. Do you think they're trying to pander to racists?
An interesting question. I could see the sense of going private in boroughs where the State schools are poor, but I can't see the point of beggaring yourself where the schools are good.
Completely agree - we are weighing up state vs. private at the moment.
But the point was that SO's sweeping assertion that state schools, like for like, outperform private schools is not borne out by the fact that people are prepared to beggar themselves for private education: on the assumption they are rational, then they must perceive advantage in the investment
It's not my assertion. It's what PISA states. The PISA stats are constantly used as evidence that the state school system has gone to the dogs, but what they also show is that on a like for like basis state schools outperform private schools. Clearly there are significant advantages to a private school education - your children will be taught in smaller class sizes, the facilities they enjoy will be second to none, the children they mix with will be far less likely to have damaging problems at home that they bring to the classroom, and so on; but judged on results, private schools do not deliver what they should.
So there's no reason for left-wing ex-public schoolboys to whip up hatred against them then? Or to want to bias the university admissions system against independent schools, given that they confer no advantage?
Well, we do know that state school pupils tend to out-perform private school students with higher grades at universities, so for the sake of the country there is some sense in positively discriminating in favour of state school pupils.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Not even you can defend the indefensible. So you don't try.
I agree with him but he isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act
Nigel Farage: "No."
The wise one misunderstands again
You can keep saying that as often as you like, but when asked a very careful question, Nigel Farage gave a very clear answer. He would enable racists to discriminate on the ground of race or colour.
God knows I'm no fan of the arse Farage, but what he said and the context in which he said it support constructions other than the one you're putting on it.
For example, suppose he had been asked if there should be laws against witchcraft. He would have said No to that as well. This could be because he thinks witchcraft should be tolerated, but it could also be because he thinks 1/ it does not actually exist and 2/ that having laws that assert otherwise encourages the burning of old ladies who own cats.
AIUI Farage had previously said that he didn't think there was any racism left in this country. You needn't agree with him to follow why he'd then say we don't need the laws.
Exactly
Even the greats in their own eyes get it wrong sometimes it seems
Lol, I suppose it's a step on from not inhaling. If you can remember the frenzied, wild, bohemian decade of 1970s Glasgow housing schemes, you weren't there.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 29 secs30 seconds ago Lewisham, London
Buzzfeed: "Jim Murphy has been forced to issue a statement saying he's never sniffed glue". Labour campaign goes from strength to strength.
Put the top back on the pritt stick....
copydex?
Some of my friends and I were keen on Airfix plastic kits when young, years before glue-sniffing became a moral panic. My mother was very shaken when she realised the connotations ... not that we knew either, except perhaps subliminally!
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
Are you as bonkers as Farage? The issue is simple. He clearly said he would repeal the race relations act. No law on discrimination on race or colour. On being pressed about if that was a wise move he clearly confirmed his opinion and said that this law was not needed now.
This excuse for repeal is a farce and a fudge - Farage and UKIP clearly want to appeal to all those who want to take advantage of the repeal of such laws. If you are coloured or foreign in UKIPland you will be discriminated against and have no protection. Next stop the homosexuals. Anyone who is different. UKIP's appeal is stark and blatant.
No, as per usual having blown his 'wink wink nudge nudge say no more' dog whistle as loudly has he can, he rows back 'wot me guv? No its all a fit up.'
If you agree with all that - fine. Just say so. Perhaps Farage will have performed a useful service if at last he is open about where he and UKIP are coming from.
Sorry, but after waiting 2 hours and a failed Google search, this is still bugging me – why would you pass coal smoke through milk and what do you do with it, after you have?
Coal gas - what you used for gas cooking before North Sea gas. You drank the milk! As coal gas was a complex mixture of methane, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, etc., I'm not quite sure wat the active ingredient was (or rather the desirable one). Dr Spyn will no doubt enlighten us.
Many thanks Mr Carnyx - a cheap, legal high no doubt and presumably as coal 'gas' was used, this practice has long since died out.
@Carnyx has more knowledge of this than is good for him...I think that the methane was important, unlike the coal smoke.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
Who cooks it is pretty important.
And you would hope that they are hired on merit. It may just be that Indian cooks are better at cooking Indian food than any other nationality.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
Actually, I'd expect to be served Chinese or Indian food. Who gives to me hardly matters.
Who cooks it is pretty important.
are you saying that only Chinese or Indian people can cook Chinese or Indian food? Wow
re Farage and the change in law-Everyone should have the right to change laws by getting elected and then doing so. If we expect people to abide by the law we should expect people to have the freedom to change laws. When people get hounded because they want to change the law then its the people who do the hounding that have a problem.
I'm amused at the way it's transformed from 'global warming' to 'climate change', as if the climate would otherwise naturally be in some kind of steady state, a perpetual stasis that has been wrecked by man's industrial activity.
They were sick of people going "It's snowing outside - so much for that that global warming hurff durff." So they chose climate change instead.
I'm amused at the way it's transformed from 'global warming' to 'climate change', as if the climate would otherwise naturally be in some kind of steady state, a perpetual stasis that has been wrecked by man's industrial activity.
You're amused by something that never happened?
The IPCC was established decades ago, and hasn't changed its name. The acronym for the UN process is something like UNFCC, and is likewise as old as things get in this field. It has been "Climate Change" from the very beginning.
It's just another one of those bullshit denier memes you've picked up from somewhere and repeat on and on and on as if it proves something, when it doesn't prove anything at all, because it isn't true.
You're correct about the dates but the substantive point is true. Climate change wasn't alarming enough so despite it being the IPCC not the IPGW, the ecofascists started banging on about global warming. The switch back to climate change came about as people increasingly laughed at the absence of warming. Recall that a big part of the effort and scandal in the warming industry has related to trying to prove there's any warming at all; a task addressed mainly by making the past colder.
re Farage and the change in law-Everyone should have the right to change laws by getting elected and then doing so. If we expect people to abide by the law we should expect people to have the freedom to change laws. When people get hounded because they want to change the law then its the people who do the hounding that have a problem.
If the law changes sought are obnoxious, then of course those proposing the changes should be hounded.
Yes, it is best done by a chef, and staff who have a concept of hygiene. Other than that, how would you know the difference?
On the balance of probabilities, I'd expect a Chinese chef to cook the best Chinese food and an Indian chef to cook the best Indian food. It's not set in stone, but it's a good rule of thumb.
"The SNP are a peaceful, democratic and law-abiding political party. If the people of Scotland choose to elect them to the UK Parliament, they have exactly the same right to participate in that Parliament as any other party’s MPs. If that right is no longer to be accepted because the SNP are a threat to the integrity and security of the country, then it’s clearly improper that the party should continue to be allowed to exist at all."
NB for some of us on PB: the irony meter is in the red levels.
And you would hope that they are hired on merit. It may just be that Indian cooks are better at cooking Indian food than any other nationality.
Often I've been to eg a Japanese restaurant and the staff are Chinese or some other variation of Eastern Asian. Or a Chinese restaurant with Thai staff etc
Superficially appear to ignorant westerners as "authentic" but no more authentic than you or I. Being a good chef or waiter should be all that matters.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Mr. Antifrank, it's worth pointing out Sadiq Khan wants quotas for ethnic minorities, and there has been muttering of all-minority shortlists for constituencies.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
There of course is the double standard in these things. Repealing anti-discrimination legislation is considered outrageous. Ethnic quotas or all-women shortlists are considered legitimate.
Anti discrimination legislation allows many forms of exemptions or exceptions where they can be reasonable justified. I would describe this more as common sense than double standards.
Yes, indeed. Things like allowing Chinese or Indian restaurants to stipulate that staff be of Chinese or Indian origin. I think Sadiq Khan's proposals for ethnic quotas go a long way beyond that.
Why should Chinese and Indian restaurants have staff of those origins? British hotels and restaurants employ foreigners all the time
Well, I think when people go to a Chinese or Indian restaurant they'd expect to be served by Chinese or Indian staff. That seems a reasonable exemption from anti-discrimination legislation.
They expect it only because they've been used to it for so long, they've forgotten it's racism.
By the same logic, hotel guests might today expect there to be no blacks or Irish staying in hotels.
re Farage and the change in law-Everyone should have the right to change laws by getting elected and then doing so. If we expect people to abide by the law we should expect people to have the freedom to change laws. When people get hounded because they want to change the law then its the people who do the hounding that have a problem.
If the law changes sought are obnoxious, then of course those proposing the changes should be hounded.
and who decides which change in law is obnoxious? You are no more worthy than Farage ,I don't know why you think you are. You have the right to argue the law is good as it stands and he has the right to say it isn't . Debate the law not your moral superiority
Yes, it is best done by a chef, and staff who have a concept of hygiene. Other than that, how would you know the difference?
On the balance of probabilities, I'd expect a Chinese chef to cook the best Chinese food and an Indian chef to cook the best Indian food. It's not set in stone, but it's a good rule of thumb.
What develops from that goes against almost every equality argument ever made, I cant believe you are saying it actually
Yes, it is best done by a chef, and staff who have a concept of hygiene. Other than that, how would you know the difference?
On the balance of probabilities, I'd expect a Chinese chef to cook the best Chinese food and an Indian chef to cook the best Indian food. It's not set in stone, but it's a good rule of thumb.
You realise that a huge proportion of Indian restaurants aren't staffed by Indians right? 8 out of 10 Indians are actually owned by Bangladeshis and huge proportion of those have Bangladeshi chefs.
Yes, it is best done by a chef, and staff who have a concept of hygiene. Other than that, how would you know the difference?
On the balance of probabilities, I'd expect a Chinese chef to cook the best Chinese food and an Indian chef to cook the best Indian food. It's not set in stone, but it's a good rule of thumb.
re Farage and the change in law-Everyone should have the right to change laws by getting elected and then doing so. If we expect people to abide by the law we should expect people to have the freedom to change laws. When people get hounded because they want to change the law then its the people who do the hounding that have a problem.
If the law changes sought are obnoxious, then of course those proposing the changes should be hounded.
and who decides which change in law is obnoxious? You are no more worthy than Farage ,I don't know why you think you are. You have the right to argue the law is good as it stands and he has the right to say it isn't . Debate the law not your moral superiority
Free speech and then the electorate at the election decide.
"latest Farage story on workplace race-legislation" - Mr Smithson showing his bias, again. Not race based as N Farage and UKIP emphasized but nationality based. Very large difference, as he well knows.
Aren't you meant to be clever? He isn't proposing to ban them
He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation. And then he lied about doing just that.
But the UKIP devotees won't believe the evidence of their own ears, it seems.
'He was proposing to scrap race-based discrimination legislation.'
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Since you seem to have difficulty listening, let me try you with reading:
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Ah the wise one misunderstands... Ask someone in your woe is me special interest group to explain it to you while you grizzle about everyone walking in a different direction out if the train station
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
Are you as bonkers as Farage? The issue is simple. He clearly said he would repeal the race relations act. No law on discrimination on race or colour. On being pressed about if that was a wise move he clearly confirmed his opinion and said that this law was not needed now.
This excuse for repeal is a farce and a fudge - Farage and UKIP clearly want to appeal to all those who want to take advantage of the repeal of such laws. If you are coloured or foreign in UKIPland you will be discriminated against and have no protection. Next stop the homosexuals. Anyone who is different. UKIP's appeal is stark and blatant.
No, as per usual having blown his 'wink wink nudge nudge say no more' dog whistle as loudly has he can, he rows back 'wot me guv? No its all a fit up.'
If you agree with all that - fine. Just say so. Perhaps Farage will have performed a useful service if at last he is open about where he and UKIP are coming from.
Show me how removing discrimination legislation means that people of colour are automatically discriminated against? Please point to the legislation in our criminal and civil justice system which deems the colour of one person's skin as having preference over another persons skin?
Comments
If you want three at big prices, there's lots of value in the 4.40 pm. I've had small bets on:
Jolly's Cracked It 20/1
Conquisto 80/1
Party Rock 50/1
If you are really feeling brave, do the trifecta!
If you can remember the frenzied, wild, bohemian decade of 1970s Glasgow housing schemes, you weren't there.
Are you sure?
Want to bet on it being in the manifesto?
Trevor Phillips: “In UKIP-land there would be no law against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour?”
Nigel Farage: "No."
Or wrote a blog about it, just for yourself, to keep a check on your opinions, but publish it & link to it at every opportunity ?
The comparisons are valid in as much as we may well have been arguing about whether smoking was harmful in the 50s/60s. Then we had rival scientists (some sponsored by industry) disputing it. The MMR controversy happened more recently.
Nigel Farage: "No."
Science isn't about niceness, or nastiness, it's about reality.
I could just as easily claim that the Church's teaching centuries ago about the Earth being the centre of the universe was believed by many but disproved by science, as climate change will be.
If it turns up in yesterday's form, it's a just a question of how far it wins.
It'd be nice if the same opprobrium currently heaped upon Farage were equally piled upon Khan.
Farage: Would there be a law against discrimination on the grounds or race or colour? No.
iSam: Farage isn't proposing to scrap the race relations act.
Those two statements contradict.
It seems to me that in large part what Phillips and Farage were doing in that section was speculating about a society under a UKIP government. Now only the most unrealistic of UKIP supporters would claim that is going to happen anytime soon. So it seems to me they could well have been talking in ideals. Don't you think it would be nice to aspire to a society that was colour blind where such legislation was unnecessary?.
That is very different to the real world where Farage freely admits that he would change employment law to ensure British nationals were given preference over overseas workers but would not as he repeatedly stated yesterday interfere with race relations legislation currently.
I may be proved wrong should the full context of the discussions with Phillips be broadcast (if C4 don't do a typical hatchet job) and prove he was alluding to the current situation but until it would be hasty to preclude the possibility that they were talking in ideals.
As for the lying charge? I can quote chapter verse on the 'lies' of the last three Prime Ministers two of the last three chancellors and more Ministers than I would like to recall.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJifqiTj_Ow
Like him you have an agenda and you are sticking to it. Self interest.
Why do you publish and link to blogs you say you only write to keep track of your betting thoughts? Would you publish your diary online every time you write an entry?
(That's a joke. Sort of.)
And there's rancid hypocrisy as far as weather not being climate goes. If it's hot, or cold, or stormy, or calm, there's always someone claiming that's 'proof' of anthropogenic global warming.
Mr. Mark, of course. A gentleman wouldn't want either to go unsatisfied.
Of course, the most pernicious aspect of such things has been seen by the inaction in Rotherham and elsewhere.
Posted at 16:12 (BBC live)
This is an interesting little story from the Guardian. It reports the "elite bastions of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions" have been exempted from the government's counter-terror ban on extremist speakers from university campuses.
It says: "The two prestigious student societies have escaped from the home secretary, Theresa May's counter-terror crackdown on non-violent extremism in higher education after a strong lobby from senior Tory peers."
Home Office ministers confirmed to the newspaper that the two unions have been exempted from the ban.
Very grown up, considering they have twisted everything else to suit their political bias, and excite the more mentally unbalanced section of the voters.
The IPCC was established decades ago, and hasn't changed its name. The acronym for the UN process is something like UNFCC, and is likewise as old as things get in this field. It has been "Climate Change" from the very beginning.
It's just another one of those bullshit denier memes you've picked up from somewhere and repeat on and on and on as if it proves something, when it doesn't prove anything at all, because it isn't true.
Not that that should worry your flame-retardant wiffle-stick.....
For example, suppose he had been asked if there should be laws against witchcraft. He would have said No to that as well. This could be because he thinks witchcraft should be tolerated, but it could also be because he thinks 1/ it does not actually exist and 2/ that having laws that assert otherwise encourages the burning of old ladies who own cats.
AIUI Farage had previously said that he didn't think there was any racism left in this country. You needn't agree with him to follow why he'd then say we don't need the laws.
The issue is simple.
He clearly said he would repeal the race relations act. No law on discrimination on race or colour. On being pressed about if that was a wise move he clearly confirmed his opinion and said that this law was not needed now.
This excuse for repeal is a farce and a fudge - Farage and UKIP clearly want to appeal to all those who want to take advantage of the repeal of such laws. If you are coloured or foreign in UKIPland you will be discriminated against and have no protection. Next stop the homosexuals. Anyone who is different. UKIP's appeal is stark and blatant.
No, as per usual having blown his 'wink wink nudge nudge say no more' dog whistle as loudly has he can, he rows back 'wot me guv? No its all a fit up.'
If you agree with all that - fine. Just say so.
Perhaps Farage will have performed a useful service if at last he is open about where he and UKIP are coming from.
Someone else I know online went to school with her.
Mr. Me, 'denier'? I'm not rejecting a well-established historical genocide, I'm disputing a contentious theory.
As for the IPCC: I have little respect for a supposedly scientific body who got their forecasts entirely wrong and then increased their confidence in their own predictive powers for their next set of forecasts.
The talk a decade or two ago was all about 'global warming', and this has ceased. I shan't bother to check, and instead concede that the IPCC has been in existence for quite some time.
But good jokes all the same - especially the second.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jun/06/universities-urged-lower-entry-grades-comprehensive-school-pupils
Even the greats in their own eyes get it wrong sometimes it seems
"Who cooks it is pretty important. "
Yes, it is best done by a chef, and staff who have a concept of hygiene.
Other than that, how would you know the difference?
Chinese jobs for Chinese workers!
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/australia-pre-qualifying.html
wingsoverscotland.com/a-terrorist-organisation/#more-68291
"The SNP are a peaceful, democratic and law-abiding political party. If the people of Scotland choose to elect them to the UK Parliament, they have exactly the same right to participate in that Parliament as any other party’s MPs. If that right is no longer to be accepted because the SNP are a threat to the integrity and security of the country, then it’s clearly improper that the party should continue to be allowed to exist at all."
NB for some of us on PB: the irony meter is in the red levels.
Superficially appear to ignorant westerners as "authentic" but no more authentic than you or I. Being a good chef or waiter should be all that matters.
By the same logic, hotel guests might today expect there to be no blacks or Irish staying in hotels.
You are truly ridiculous.