I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
Frankly, they're going to have to do a lot better than that if they're to have a genuine chance of winning. Assuming that electorate are stupid is generally not a good idea.
My Muslim friends on Facebook all have the French tricolour up as an expression of solidarity FWIW.
It doesn't do much, but it is an interesting change. I do not recall any of them doing so after the Hebdo and Kosher supermarket massacres.
They are genuine friends too, beyond Facebook.
Possibly because this attack was so random. Anyone could have been a victim. There was no explanation for why people were chosen. So maybe people are now beginning to realise that there is no "why" beyond the fact of being in the West and not on the side of IS - or even just not IS. Anyone anywhere could be a target. That's pretty scary. Whereas if it's only specific targets - the military, Jews, cartoonists, Americans or whoever - you can persuade yourself that you're not one of the targets and so are relatively safe.
It is interesting that the Manichean view - if you're not with us you're against us - is held by IS, even though it is an accusation all too often hurled at those who would do something about IS and their supporters.
Whereas in January you pretty soon got people explaining why the cartoonists had it coming, why Jews were picked and, in some cases, those explanations pretty soon morphed into justifications and victim-blaming.
It is also true that most of the people actively killing IS fighters are Muslim, and most of the people being killed by IS are Muslim.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
You’d think in Oldham people would know better than to tell downright lies at election time. I know UKIP probably haven’t got an experienced agent, but ..........
Is this allowed under electoral law? The photo doesn't show the whole leaflet so can't be sure, but it appears to not have any indication that is actually UKIP.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
You’d think in Oldham people would know better than to tell downright lies at election time. I know UKIP probably haven’t got an experienced agent, but ..........
Is this allowed under electoral law? The photo doesn't show the whole leaflet so can't be sure, but it appears to not have any indication that is actually UKIP.
No it is not - see the case law I cited in another post .
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
Steyn said, "... I've been listening to you guys all morning, and it's striking to me, every interview you've had, Tucker has said... some variation of: 'Is it really a good idea to admit millions and millions of Muslims to European countries?' And people then start to tap dance around that issue, but when you get to it, that's at the heart of it - that there is a large pool of people who...provide a comfort zone within which this virus incubates. And at some point, if M Hollande, and Mr Cameron, and all these people talking about 'our values' this morning are serious about that, they will have to do as Tucker did and ask themselves that question, and come up with an answer to it."
Watch out publishing stories by that man, Roger will come on babbling about Melanie Phillips again.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
My Muslim friends on Facebook all have the French tricolour up as an expression of solidarity FWIW.
It doesn't do much, but it is an interesting change. I do not recall any of them doing so after the Hebdo and Kosher supermarket massacres.
They are genuine friends too, beyond Facebook.
Possibly because this attack was so random. Anyone could have been a victim. There was no explanation for why people were chosen. So maybe people are now beginning to realise that there is no "why" beyond the fact of being in the West and not on the side of IS - or even just not IS. Anyone anywhere could be a target. That's pretty scary. Whereas if it's only specific targets - the military, Jews, cartoonists, Americans or whoever - you can persuade yourself that you're not one of the targets and so are relatively safe.
It is interesting that the Manichean view - if you're not with us you're against us - is held by IS, even though it is an accusation all too often hurled at those who would do something about IS and their supporters.
Whereas in January you pretty soon got people explaining why the cartoonists had it coming, why Jews were picked and, in some cases, those explanations pretty soon morphed into justifications and victim-blaming.
It is also true that most of the people actively killing IS fighters are Muslim, and most of the people being killed by IS are Muslim.
In the eyes of IS, only they are the true Muslims.
The 99% of people who would call themselves muslims (or who we would call muslims) are, to them, not muslims.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
What made it comic(*) was the desperate attempts of various on "progressive" left to try and blame Klinghoffer for his own murder. Apparently he was rude to a hijacker or something. This included an Opera which depicted him as badly as it could.
Martin Buxant, a journalist at L'Echo, says Belgian security services believe 20 people were able to participate "near or far" in the Paris attack, says Matthew Holehouse.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I posted my Ally Ackbar! suidice cat avatar passim to the Kay Burley tweet timeline - no one has objected so far and many found it most amusing. I think I'll change mine back.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
What made it comic(*) was the desperate attempts of various on "progressive" left to try and blame Klinghoffer for his own murder. Apparently he was rude to a hijacker or something. This included an Opera which depicted him as badly as it could.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I repeat that it not what is said or not said in the leaflets nor whether what is said is true or not but that electoral and case law says that to publish a leaflet in imitation of another party's literature with intent to deceive the electors is illegal .
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
F1 drivers stood in minutes silence on the Brazilian grid with a wall of remembrance of the pictures of all the victims.
The minute's silence was originally to do with the World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims. They then expanded the silence to include the French tragedy.
The piccies were a wall of remembrance to do with the former, not the latter. I think there's a conference about road safety in Brazil next week.
Noted. I saw the board and the fact some are wearing black armbands as well. Sky's Brundell thought it was Paris or the armbands anyway. Interesting as Hamilton apparently had a small RTA in Monaco this week. No one injured.
I'm not a fan of Moseley, but one of the good things he did whilst president of the FIA was put hundreds of millions - and ultimately potentially billions - of dollars from sale of rights to Ecclestone into the FIA Foundation, a charity which works on motorsport and road safety.
For instance, the FIA and the Foundation were heavily involved in getting Euro NCAP into use throughout the continent. That alone must have saved tens of thousands of lives.
I also think part of Schumacher's punishment in 1997 for his deliberate crash into Villeneuve was to do a certain number of hours of road safety promotion work.
The FIA are *really* into road safety. And good on them.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
Thanks. Was aware of that but he was initially singled out as Jewish and probably American and part of the capitalist society. From the link......
"The next day, after being refused permission by the Syrian government to dock at Tartus, the hijackers singled out Klinghoffer, a Jew, for murder, shooting him in the forehead and chest as he sat in his wheelchair. "
In the Paris attacks there seems to have been no such identification other than they were in wheelchairs.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
I imagine it's all part of their vision of a polarised society that will finally start making with the mythical 'backlash' that the twitterati are apparently perpetually terrified will happen.
They have no conception of how lethargic the West is; when changing your Facebook profile picture is considered commitment to a cause, we're hardly going to be doing something as energetic as hunting down Muslims. That would require going outside.
Corbyn clearly doesn't believe in abolishing or axing our armed forces.
He does believe that the Monarchy shouldn't exist though, and he's no great fan of the Falklands.
Also he does seem to have a policy of uncontrolled immigration too.
The leaflet is a little extreme, but Corbyn can't complain about that!
I wouldn't be surprised if he's sympathised with the Costa Rican position at some point over the last 30 years. They haven't had a military since 1948:
F1 drivers stood in minutes silence on the Brazilian grid with a wall of remembrance of the pictures of all the victims.
The minute's silence was originally to do with the World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims. They then expanded the silence to include the French tragedy.
The piccies were a wall of remembrance to do with the former, not the latter. I think there's a conference about road safety in Brazil next week.
Noted. I saw the board and the fact some are wearing black armbands as well. Sky's Brundell thought it was Paris or the armbands anyway. Interesting as Hamilton apparently had a small RTA in Monaco this week. No one injured.
I'm not a fan of Moseley, but one of the good things he did whilst president of the FIA was put hundreds of millions - and ultimately potentially billions - of dollars from sale of rights to Ecclestone into the FIA Foundation, a charity which works on motorsport and road safety.
For instance, the FIA and the Foundation were heavily involved in getting Euro NCAP into use throughout the continent. That alone must have saved tens of thousands of lives.
I also think part of Schumacher's punishment in 1997 for his deliberate crash into Villeneuve was to do a certain number of hours of road safety promotion work.
The FIA are *really* into road safety. And good on them.
Do you mean footballers can teach witnesses to an accident to roll around on the ground, in pretend agony, hoping they will get a payout decision in their favour?
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I repeat that it not what is said or not said in the leaflets nor whether what is said is true or not but that electoral and case law says that to publish a leaflet in imitation of another party's literature with intent to deceive the electors is illegal .
The leaflet will clearly have the necessary regulatory information identifying who produced it and on who's behalf. As all leaflets do. Electioneering 101.
F1 drivers stood in minutes silence on the Brazilian grid with a wall of remembrance of the pictures of all the victims.
The minute's silence was originally to do with the World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims. They then expanded the silence to include the French tragedy.
The piccies were a wall of remembrance to do with the former, not the latter. I think there's a conference about road safety in Brazil next week.
Noted. I saw the board and the fact some are wearing black armbands as well. Sky's Brundell thought it was Paris or the armbands anyway. Interesting as Hamilton apparently had a small RTA in Monaco this week. No one injured.
I'm not a fan of Moseley, but one of the good things he did whilst president of the FIA was put hundreds of millions - and ultimately potentially billions - of dollars from sale of rights to Ecclestone into the FIA Foundation, a charity which works on motorsport and road safety.
For instance, the FIA and the Foundation were heavily involved in getting Euro NCAP into use throughout the continent. That alone must have saved tens of thousands of lives.
I also think part of Schumacher's punishment in 1997 for his deliberate crash into Villeneuve was to do a certain number of hours of road safety promotion work.
The FIA are *really* into road safety. And good on them.
Do you mean footballers can teach witnesses to an accident to roll around on the ground, in pretend agony, hoping they will get a payout decision in their favour?
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
Thanks. Was aware of that but he was initially singled out as Jewish and probably American and part of the capitalist society. From the link......
"The next day, after being refused permission by the Syrian government to dock at Tartus, the hijackers singled out Klinghoffer, a Jew, for murder, shooting him in the forehead and chest as he sat in his wheelchair. "
In the Paris attacks there seems to have been no such identification other than they were in wheelchairs.
Perhaps they had a vague jihadist memory that murdering wheelchair users is cool. Of maybe they were worried that someone who could stand-up might fight back. Or maybe they had a cultural thing that disabled people are that way because they have bad souls.
I am waiting for the Comment Is Free article that explains why the people in the wheelchairs had it coming. Hmmmm. Hard one. I know! The sight of so many people having disability equipment upset the poor terrorists who knew people back home who weren't so lucky. The poor innocent terrorists couldn't help themselves.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
No it isnt, its skating on top of a 10,000 year old glacier with a hundred foot of solid ice beneath you.
It seems the UKIP campaign may have broken the law in Oldham with that leaflet, but it won't have much impact.
Interesting to note that the police and intelligence revelations on the Paris attacks shows that no matter of snoopers charter or other surveillance or curtailment bills the attack would still have occurred, which is precisely what I said yesterday.
It doesn't matter how much of a police state you have, if even Putin's KGB or the french military can't stop them what's the point, you have to go on the offensive to shift the battlefield and the focus away from the domestic front.
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
I imagine it's all part of their vision of a polarised society that will finally start making with the mythical 'backlash' that the twitterati are apparently perpetually terrified will happen.
They have no conception of how lethargic the West is; when changing your Facebook profile picture is considered commitment to a cause, we're hardly going to be doing something as energetic as hunting down Muslims. That would require going outside.
The "backlash" they are waiting for is because the "twiterati" have a fairly profound racial hatred for the native inhabitants of this country. Seriously, Sanders Of The River had more respect for the natives that he was ruling...
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
Thanks. Was aware of that but he was initially singled out as Jewish and probably American and part of the capitalist society. From the link......
"The next day, after being refused permission by the Syrian government to dock at Tartus, the hijackers singled out Klinghoffer, a Jew, for murder, shooting him in the forehead and chest as he sat in his wheelchair. "
In the Paris attacks there seems to have been no such identification other than they were in wheelchairs.
Perhaps they had a vague jihadist memory that murdering wheelchair users is cool. Of maybe they were worried that someone who could stand-up might fight back. Or maybe they had a cultural thing that disabled people are that way because they have bad souls.
I am waiting for the Comment Is Free article that explains why the people in the wheelchairs had it coming. Hmmmm. Hard one. I know! The sight of so many people having disability equipment upset the poor terrorists who knew people back home who weren't so lucky. The poor innocent terrorists couldn't help themselves.
Isn't it as simple as the wheelchair area is usually raised and has barriers? The disabled could not get out of the way as easily or dive for cover.
I don't think that they cared who they killed, just went for the easiest targets.
'Most of the country will be focussing on the football next June.'
Really? It'll be interesting to know the figures, but most people I know'll be actively trying to avoid the football.
Watching a corrupt sport where overpaid idiots act like prima donnas? No thanks.
I've got F1 for that.
Tbh, football is far more popular than F1 in this country, and globally. It's quite common to have a favourite football team, whereas the only blokes I know who are info F1 are 50+!
Thanks, but you're well out on the age front!
I started watching F1 in the late 1970s, when I was knee high to a grassshopper. (I used to get dragged out to rally stages at a similar age, to stand in mud for hours to watch a few cars come whizzing past for a few minutes). I'm surprised I became a fan after that!
My slightly sarcastic point is that there is a tendency for the football fanatics to believe that everyone is interested in football. From memory, the figures show that the majority are not.
Yet we have to suffer the constant media blitz inn-season, and during tournaments it's terrible. The problem is you cannot avoid it: heck, even CBeebies has a footie show now.
I don't find the media blitz in regard to tournaments terrible....
I've never thought that most people actively follow football in the sense of watching every match, and following the careers of the top 50 footballers. However, in relative to other sports, in my experience it's the most popular. It's always the sport you see young boys (and increasingly young girls) playing in the playground. It's also a sport where people are likely to take a causal interest, for patriotic purposes during the World Cup, or Euro 2016 for example.
Whereas I barley I know anyone my age who is interested in F1. Rugby, is a different matter though, but I've never really been interested in Rugby.
Re previous post, not all over 50's are daft enough to watch F1
Many of your countrymen do watch F1, and no wonder: Scotland has a long and illustrious history in the sport. Jim Clark, Jackie Stewart, Allan McNish, David Coulthard, Paul Di Resta and others. In fact, if you widen it out to motorsport in general then there're so more you can add, not the least being Dario Franchitti and Colin McRae.
So many world champions for a country of your size. Another benefit of the union!
When I were a bairn, my mum explained to me that Jim Clark got where he was (or at least an early step up) because of the Borders roads around Duns (his home town in Berwickshire). Not sure that has anything to do with the Union, mind!
Paris Prosecutor Francois Molins told reporters that the suicide vests worn by the attackers contained the powerful but unstable explosive TATP, and French news media quoted intelligence specialists as saying the vests were likely to have been made in Europe, if not in France, by an explosives expert who was not among the attackers. Trained bombmakers are considered too valuable to participate in suicide attacks themselves, the specialists said.
Paris Prosecutor Francois Molins told reporters that the suicide vests worn by the attackers contained the powerful but unstable explosive TATP, and French news media quoted intelligence specialists as saying the vests were likely to have been made in Europe, if not in France, by an explosives expert who was not among the attackers. Trained bombmakers are considered too valuable to participate in suicide attacks themselves, the specialists said.
So there is an ISIS bomb factory somewhere in France or Belgium.
It seems the UKIP campaign may have broken the law in Oldham with that leaflet, but it won't have much impact.
Interesting to note that the police and intelligence revelations on the Paris attacks shows that no matter of snoopers charter or other surveillance or curtailment bills the attack would still have occurred, which is precisely what I said yesterday.
It doesn't matter how much of a police state you have, if even Putin's KGB or the french military can't stop them what's the point, you have to go on the offensive to shift the battlefield and the focus away from the domestic front.
As I pointed out in another thread, repression can work - if done at a totalitarian level.
Another alternative is the threat of the mob - this is how the Copts are kept down in Egypt, or the Christians in Pakistan. Sneeze and the lynch mob will burn down the whole neighborhood.
Can't say either of them is appealing to me.
Hence my preference for a low level dirty war in the shadows.
Paris Prosecutor Francois Molins told reporters that the suicide vests worn by the attackers contained the powerful but unstable explosive TATP, and French news media quoted intelligence specialists as saying the vests were likely to have been made in Europe, if not in France, by an explosives expert who was not among the attackers. Trained bombmakers are considered too valuable to participate in suicide attacks themselves, the specialists said.
So there is an ISIS bomb factory somewhere in France or Belgium.
I believe that is the suggestion.
Also from that article states one of those named did fight with ISIS and returned to Europe.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I repeat that it not what is said or not said in the leaflets nor whether what is said is true or not but that electoral and case law says that to publish a leaflet in imitation of another party's literature with intent to deceive the electors is illegal .
Noted. I was just speaking generally there about statements made.
When I were a bairn, my mum explained to me that Jim Clark got where he was (or at least an early step up) because of the Borders roads around Duns (his home town in Berwickshire). Not sure that has anything to do with the Union, mind!
It used to be said that man from the south of Finland went into circuit motorsport, whilst those from the north of Finland went into rallying. The reason being the south of the country had empty tarmac roads, whereas the north had empty gravel roads that were covered in snow and ice for much of the time!
No idea if that's true (I think Keke was from northern Finland), though it's a good story.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. That is not. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
It is yet another indication of the level of sophistication and coordination involved in this attack. People from a number of countries, people smuggling, suicide vest making, calm coordinated attacks, attackers ability to engage in a fire fight with the police and push them back.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. That is not. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
It is yet another indication of the level of sophistication and coordination involved in this attack. People from a number of countries, people smuggling, suicide vest making, calm coordinated attacks, attackers ability to engage in a fire fight with the police and push them back.
Unfortunately that have had a series of very good training grounds; Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria etc.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
Well ISIS has 4 years of fighting experience, plus a lot of western weapons in their arsenal, and plenty of members that may have been trained by westerners before they jumped ship to them.
Basically any syrian rebel who took a course in explosives making by lets say the CIA and disappeared would be a suspect.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
Well ISIS has 4 years of fighting experience, plus a lot of western weapons in their arsenal, and plenty of members that may have been trained by westerners before they jumped ship to them.
Basically any syrian rebel who took a course in explosives making by lets say the CIA and disappeared would be a suspect.
Poor little middle easterners - can't do anything unless someone from the CIA tells them to, and how to do it.
The imam of the mosque where Omar Ismail Mostefai was allegedly radicalised says he "totally" condemns the Paris terror attacks against "innocent people, writes Rory Mulhlland in Chartres.
Speaking in Arabic, Ibrahim El Ghoul told reporters at a press conference in the mosque he "shared the sadness" caused by Friday's terror attacks. "Our hearts are crying," he said.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I repeat that it not what is said or not said in the leaflets nor whether what is said is true or not but that electoral and case law says that to publish a leaflet in imitation of another party's literature with intent to deceive the electors is illegal .
Noted. I was just speaking generally there about statements made.
I mean, is there an intention to deceive? Only insofar as at first glance, it looks like a Labour leaflet, so it isn't chucked straight in the bin. Once you read the detail, I can't say that the intention of that was to replicate a Labour leaflet.
On a separate note, there was a report on R5 this morning regarding Rotherham and safe guarding of vulnerable children. It seems like nothing much has changed and it is feared that things are continuing as before.
"Cabinet Minister in sex blackmail plot: Politician confesses to affair after Cameron aide is accused of scheme to film trysts A Cabinet Minister has alerted Number 10 about a sex blackmail plot It is claimed Tory director Mark Clarke planned to film the minister The minster came forward after Tory activist Elliot Johnson killed himself Mark Clarke has denied any bullying or attempted blackmail claims"
On a separate note, there was a report on R5 this morning regarding Rotherham and safe guarding of vulnerable children. It seems like nothing much has changed and it is feared that things are continuing as before.
The French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve has given more details about the attacks after meeting his Belgian counterpart.
"The investigation will show that the Paris attacks were prepared abroad, by a group of individuals based in Belgium who benefited from accomplices in France.
Looking at the Sex Blackmail Scandal in the Tory party's and No.10 high command, they are very lucky that the Paris attacks happened only 2 days before, this is an explosive scandal.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
The problem is it was registered as being used in Greece in October by the local authorities ( forget any stamps on pages) as part of the refugee intake. So purchased in Turkey, used a short while later in Greece to gain illegal entry amongst the masses of people flooding North and turns up at a massacre in Paris a few weeks later.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
Whereas Roger doesn't know that the Lebanese are Arabs. Nice of him to parade his ignorance so publicly :-)
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
No it isnt, its skating on top of a 10,000 year old glacier with a hundred foot of solid ice beneath you.
"Cabinet Minister in sex blackmail plot: Politician confesses to affair after Cameron aide is accused of scheme to film trysts A Cabinet Minister has alerted Number 10 about a sex blackmail plot It is claimed Tory director Mark Clarke planned to film the minister The minster came forward after Tory activist Elliot Johnson killed himself Mark Clarke has denied any bullying or attempted blackmail claims"
When I were a bairn, my mum explained to me that Jim Clark got where he was (or at least an early step up) because of the Borders roads around Duns (his home town in Berwickshire). Not sure that has anything to do with the Union, mind!
It used to be said that man from the south of Finland went into circuit motorsport, whilst those from the north of Finland went into rallying. The reason being the south of the country had empty tarmac roads, whereas the north had empty gravel roads that were covered in snow and ice for much of the time!
No idea if that's true (I think Keke was from northern Finland), though it's a good story.
Actually, the last time I went Duns way, there seemed a variety of roads - some hilly/curvy narrow roads sheep country and some straighter ones in the rich grain country of the Merse. So I now wonder which Mum meant! Or both!
(Some interesting discussions OT here, by the way.)
On a separate note, there was a report on R5 this morning regarding Rotherham and safe guarding of vulnerable children. It seems like nothing much has changed and it is feared that things are continuing as before.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
No it isnt, its skating on top of a 10,000 year old glacier with a hundred foot of solid ice beneath you.
UKIP and contempt for the law!
I personally wouldnt have a problem with it, if it didnt say 'Labour news' on it. It goes beyond my own moral code, but as long as the imprint is correct at the bottom, there is no contempt or law broke.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
I think it is wrong. However, Labour have engaged in such tactics for a long while, accusing UKIP of wanting to privatise the NHS when it is clearly not in their manifesto, etc., so they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
Indeed they have and commonly it's stating in a TV interview something that is blatantly untrue and then not being challenged by the interviewer. As Mr Senior points out its a dangerous game to play by any side. Personally the comments in that leaflet have all been stated at one point or another directly or indirectly by various factions within Labour so it could be argued in that light.
I repeat that it not what is said or not said in the leaflets nor whether what is said is true or not but that electoral and case law says that to publish a leaflet in imitation of another party's literature with intent to deceive the electors is illegal .
Noted. I was just speaking generally there about statements made.
I mean, is there an intention to deceive? Only insofar as at first glance, it looks like a Labour leaflet, so it isn't chucked straight in the bin. Once you read the detail, I can't say that the intention of that was to replicate a Labour leaflet.
Silly silly politics anyway.
Well yes but it's in red and that's not UKIPS normal colours. Just wondering how many actually do read it all the way through rather than headlines before the bin. So main message is the four headlines really. As you say a bit silly and Labour are not innocent either so that's as much as I am going to defend this.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
Whilst I don't know if it's true for sure, it certainly does feel to be that way.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
No it isnt, its skating on top of a 10,000 year old glacier with a hundred foot of solid ice beneath you.
UKIP and contempt for the law!
I personally wouldnt have a problem with it, if it didnt say 'Labour news' on it. It goes beyond my own moral code, but as long as the imprint is correct at the bottom, there is no contempt or law broke.
Trump 17 points in the lead, Ted Cruz is beating Rubio in N.H., plus Carson collapsing there.
By the way I didn't bother live commenting or even watching last nights Democratic debate, who watches a political debate with 3 boring people on a Saturday night anyway.
Looking at the Sex Blackmail Scandal in the Tory party's and No.10 high command, they are very lucky that the Paris attacks happened only 2 days before, this is an explosive scandal.
Mark Clarke was always considered awful. But, we didn't realise how awful.
The imam of the mosque where Omar Ismail Mostefai was allegedly radicalised says he "totally" condemns the Paris terror attacks against "innocent people, writes Rory Mulhlland in Chartres.
Speaking in Arabic, Ibrahim El Ghoul told reporters at a press conference in the mosque he "shared the sadness" caused by Friday's terror attacks. "Our hearts are crying," he said.
Zouheir is the name of the security guard that prevented the bomber from entering the football stadium. I think it is an Arabian name.
Adel Tormos was a major hero too. He lost his life but the blast killed a third suicide bomber. Ordinary people showing extraordinary bravery is what helps me keep my faith in humanity.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
Well ISIS has 4 years of fighting experience, plus a lot of western weapons in their arsenal, and plenty of members that may have been trained by westerners before they jumped ship to them.
Basically any syrian rebel who took a course in explosives making by lets say the CIA and disappeared would be a suspect.
IS has a lot more than four years of fighting experience. If you can even get your facts straight then don't bother with the conspiracies.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
Whereas Roger doesn't know that the Lebanese are Arabs. Nice of him to parade his ignorance so publicly :-)
Indeed. But what would I know. I have only been visiting the region for 50 years (i.e. since I was a child), lived in Yemen for 3 years, speak the language, and have spent time in every Arabic country save Tunisia, Libya and Oman. I couldn't possibly understand the diversity of the Arab world.
Attacks of the type in Paris are not random, the targets are not random, they are areas of high people density. Its no more complicated than that.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
Well ISIS has 4 years of fighting experience, plus a lot of western weapons in their arsenal, and plenty of members that may have been trained by westerners before they jumped ship to them.
Basically any syrian rebel who took a course in explosives making by lets say the CIA and disappeared would be a suspect.
IS has a lot more than four years of fighting experience. If you can even get your facts straight then don't bother with the conspiracies.
Most ISIS members started their careers fighting in a civil war called the Syrian Civil War which started 4 years ago, though their leadership has plenty of it since at least the Iraq war, now get your facts straight before starting your conspiracies.
I have no time for Labour but I think doing it this under the colours of another party should be disallowed as its misrepresentation before you get to any comments that may or may not also be inaccurate. . Put up what they think other parties are doing ( lies or otherwise) but do it under your own colours so they can be seen for what they are.
It has already been established that publishing such a leaflet is fraudulent and contravenes electoral law ( EVEN if the contents of the leaflet are true ) See R v Rowe ex p Mainwaring ( 1992 ) AELR 821
It would be quite amusing were UKIP to win the by election only for them to be disqualified as per Woolas . Having said that in order for the disqualification to succeed Labour would have to produce witnesses stating that their vote was influenced by said leaflets .
Labour may or may not have started the dirty game in this by election but they have not AFAIK broken electoral law in doing so whilst UKIP have done even as I say if the contents of the leaflet were true .
In the picture there’s some very very small print at the bottom of the leaflet but it’s not legible, Even if somewhere it does say that it’s published by UKIP it’s sking on very thin ice.
No it isnt, its skating on top of a 10,000 year old glacier with a hundred foot of solid ice beneath you.
UKIP and contempt for the law!
I personally wouldnt have a problem with it, if it didnt say 'Labour news' on it. It goes beyond my own moral code, but as long as the imprint is correct at the bottom, there is no contempt or law broke.
You are simply and factually wrong . The law has been broken imprint or not . Study the precedental case law I cited earlier .
In the eyes of IS, only they are the true Muslims.
The 99% of people who would call themselves muslims (or who we would call muslims) are, to them, not muslims.
If that were so, then why don't those 99% scream that the IS actions are not done in the name of Islam, but instead some weird psychopathic invented form of Islam of their own making, undertaken by people who are on the fast track to the seventh level of hell? I mean, if a group of Manchester United fans said the only true way to show you supported Manchester United was by beheading a City fan, then it's hard to imagine Reds fans quietly acquiescing to that notion of what constitutes a true supporter... But the Islam terraces are strangely silent.
Trump 17 points in the lead, Ted Cruz is beating Rubio in N.H., plus Carson collapsing there.
By the way I didn't bother live commenting or even watching last nights Democratic debate, who watches a political debate with 3 boring people on a Saturday night anyway.
Looks like even if Carson wins Iowa Trump will swiftly retake the lead in NH
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
Whereas Roger doesn't know that the Lebanese are Arabs. Nice of him to parade his ignorance so publicly :-)
Indeed. But what would I know. I have only been visiting the region for 50 years (i.e. since I was a child), lived in Yemen for 3 years, speak the language, and have spent time in every Arabic country save Tunisia, Libya and Oman. I couldn't possibly understand the diversity of the Arab world.
The imam of the mosque where Omar Ismail Mostefai was allegedly radicalised says he "totally" condemns the Paris terror attacks against "innocent people, writes Rory Mulhlland in Chartres.
Speaking in Arabic, Ibrahim El Ghoul told reporters at a press conference in the mosque he "shared the sadness" caused by Friday's terror attacks. "Our hearts are crying," he said.
You'd have thought he would have spoke French?
Rob, I'm in two minds about that. In some ways, speaking in Arabic has a greater impact, and sends a stronger message about how unacceptable this was.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
Only Roger I don't lump ME muslims together. I attack the centres of authority of the religion. What I rail at is this supposition that there is an organized moderate Islam. There is not. There are moderate muslims aplenty, but the power structures at the core - where it matters, the ultimate interpreters of Islam - are not moderate.
Whereas Roger doesn't know that the Lebanese are Arabs. Nice of him to parade his ignorance so publicly :-)
Indeed. But what would I know. I have only been visiting the region for 50 years (i.e. since I was a child), lived in Yemen for 3 years, speak the language, and have spent time in every Arabic country save Tunisia, Libya and Oman. I couldn't possibly understand the diversity of the Arab world.
There is a parallel with marxist terrorism during the later part of the cold war, there were many in the 60's, 70's and 80's in europe who supported a variety of marxist political parties, however the actual support towards marxist terrorism, although it existed, was limited.
Comments
Re targets. The horror on horror for me was the fact in this incident it was stated on yesterday's thread that disabled people were chosen deliberately. I know that has happened before with nationalities and even religions but this I don't recollect hearing of outside of a World war of course.
I can only presume this plays into the ISIS methods used back in the Middle East of finding more and more evil and appalling ways of perpetrating terror and in particular executions.
He does believe that the Monarchy shouldn't exist though, and he's no great fan of the Falklands.
Also he does seem to have a policy of uncontrolled immigration too.
The leaflet is a little extreme, but Corbyn can't complain about that!
The 99% of people who would call themselves muslims (or who we would call muslims) are, to them, not muslims.
Can you imagine if McDonalds did an ad as a Burger King take-off?
No me neither.
https://electionleaflets.org/leaflets/
What else does it have?
* I am proud of having a sick sense of humor.
The problem with those analogies is that they are no more illuminating than 'Billy is a Scotsman and Billy is mean therefore all Scotsmen are mean'. They're just loopy generalizations. I'm particularly surprised that someone like TimT who says he has a lot of friends in the Middle East can't see the huge diversity. Lumping Middle Eastern Muslims together makes no more sense than expecting the Maronite Christians in Beirut to sort out the Catholics in the IRA.
I took two Lebanese producers to my favourite restaurant in Soho. Both attractive elegant trilingual and educated at universities in Paris and Canada. The owner asked where I'd been working. I said Beirut and introduced her to the two producers.
She said what a pity that Beirut had gone through such trauma because she'd heard it was really beautiful. She then said she'd been thinking of going to Egypt but she was put off because it's full of Arabs "and I can't stand Arabs!".
She then went to get our drinks and one of the girls said 'that was really offensive. We're Arabs'. I was really taken aback. It wasn't something I would have said but it didn't occur to me that they could be defined as Arab
When you talk of these of rotten apples I think of people like them who have less in common with the loonies in Paris than I do
For instance, the FIA and the Foundation were heavily involved in getting Euro NCAP into use throughout the continent. That alone must have saved tens of thousands of lives.
I also think part of Schumacher's punishment in 1997 for his deliberate crash into Villeneuve was to do a certain number of hours of road safety promotion work.
The FIA are *really* into road safety. And good on them.
If only football would do the same ...
http://www.fiafoundation.org/
"The next day, after being refused permission by the Syrian government to dock at Tartus, the hijackers singled out Klinghoffer, a Jew, for murder, shooting him in the forehead and chest as he sat in his wheelchair. "
In the Paris attacks there seems to have been no such identification other than they were in wheelchairs.
They have no conception of how lethargic the West is; when changing your Facebook profile picture is considered commitment to a cause, we're hardly going to be doing something as energetic as hunting down Muslims. That would require going outside.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Costa_Rica
Do you mean footballers can teach witnesses to an accident to roll around on the ground, in pretend agony, hoping they will get a payout decision in their favour?
I am waiting for the Comment Is Free article that explains why the people in the wheelchairs had it coming. Hmmmm. Hard one. I know! The sight of so many people having disability equipment upset the poor terrorists who knew people back home who weren't so lucky. The poor innocent terrorists couldn't help themselves.
Interesting to note that the police and intelligence revelations on the Paris attacks shows that no matter of snoopers charter or other surveillance or curtailment bills the attack would still have occurred, which is precisely what I said yesterday.
It doesn't matter how much of a police state you have, if even Putin's KGB or the french military can't stop them what's the point, you have to go on the offensive to shift the battlefield and the focus away from the domestic front.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/french-police-detain-7-for-questioning-in-paris-siegethe-latest-from-paris/2015/11/15/7600c208-8b38-11e5-bd91-d385b244482f_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_paris-blurb-desktoponly:homepage/story
Now that Lord Rennard has been elected to the Lib Dems federal executive will he be leading their campaign in Oldham ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34826117
I don't think that they cared who they killed, just went for the easiest targets.
Another alternative is the threat of the mob - this is how the Copts are kept down in Egypt, or the Christians in Pakistan. Sneeze and the lynch mob will burn down the whole neighborhood.
Can't say either of them is appealing to me.
Hence my preference for a low level dirty war in the shadows.
Also from that article states one of those named did fight with ISIS and returned to Europe.
One major question is who made the explosive devices. All appeared to go off, all seemed remarkably stable for what is a basically unstable compound.
That takes skill, not a Youtube video.
As long as he is never alone with a woman, he may be useful. Both police and LD internal inquiry were dropped for lack of evidence.
No idea if that's true (I think Keke was from northern Finland), though it's a good story.
Basically any syrian rebel who took a course in explosives making by lets say the CIA and disappeared would be a suspect.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3318983/Cabinet-Minister-sex-blackmail-plot-Politician-confesses-affair-Cameron-aide-accused-scheme-film-trysts.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/battle-against-isis-defining-test-6836388
Silly silly politics anyway.
"Cabinet Minister in sex blackmail plot: Politician confesses to affair after Cameron aide is accused of scheme to film trysts
A Cabinet Minister has alerted Number 10 about a sex blackmail plot
It is claimed Tory director Mark Clarke planned to film the minister
The minster came forward after Tory activist Elliot Johnson killed himself
Mark Clarke has denied any bullying or attempted blackmail claims"
"The investigation will show that the Paris attacks were prepared abroad, by a group of individuals based in Belgium who benefited from accomplices in France.
Breaking: It was a false alarm. TG
The problem is it was registered as being used in Greece in October by the local authorities ( forget any stamps on pages) as part of the refugee intake. So purchased in Turkey, used a short while later in Greece to gain illegal entry amongst the masses of people flooding North and turns up at a massacre in Paris a few weeks later.
Now that's going to be big problem for someone.
(Some interesting discussions OT here, by the way.)
Will post the post-race piece in the next hour or so. No spoilers, as Mr. B will be watching it delayed, I think.
http://m.leicestermercury.co.uk/New-bid-tackle-scourge-child-sexual-exploitation/story-28169890-detail/story.html
Good to see it getting priority even in a time of cuts.
http://gravismarketing.com/polling-and-market-research/current-new-hampshire-polling-2/
Trump 29 (-3)
Cruz 12(+7)
Rubio 10 (+2)
Bush 8 (0)
Christie 8 (+5)
Carson 7 (-6)
Kasich 5 (-5)
Paul 5 (+3)
Fiorina 4 (-4)
Trump 17 points in the lead, Ted Cruz is beating Rubio in N.H., plus Carson collapsing there.
By the way I didn't bother live commenting or even watching last nights Democratic debate, who watches a political debate with 3 boring people on a Saturday night anyway.
Adel Tormos was a major hero too. He lost his life but the blast killed a third suicide bomber. Ordinary people showing extraordinary bravery is what helps me keep my faith in humanity.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/13/lebanon-families-mourn-victims-beirut-bombings
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/brazil-post-race-analysis.html
EDIT albeit spelt "Sallah", with two Ls.
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/665866995397763072
Rob, I'm in two minds about that. In some ways, speaking in Arabic has a greater impact, and sends a stronger message about how unacceptable this was.
Number of dead has now risen to 132 confirmed