I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
Elected according to the rules of the election.
Yes that is correct - I understand how the Electoral College works thanks.
So you were being a bore without the excuse of misunderstanding? Right ho.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
Elected according to the rules of the election.
I.e. by a majority of the 538 electors Just for the record, because I've met a few people who are getting this wrong: Clinton also won a minority of the votes cast, just a bigger minority than Trump's.
Mr. M, not sure that's entirely true. Certainly in cannon technology, the Turks led the field, centuries after Khan rampaged across the world. Indeed, that's how Byzantium's famous walls were finally overcome.
"One of Europe's top hotels has admitted they had to pay thousands in Bitcoin ransom to cybercriminals who managed to hack their electronic key system, locking hundreds of guests in or out of their rooms until the money was paid.
An excellent thread, which seems to have engaged pb.com minds in real thought and debate after the stale nonsense of Trump and May and State visits.
Our western liberal governments have held it up as a sign of our systemic superiority that we are prepared to tolerate the intolerant. Which is a view; but in sitting back with a smug self-satisfaction that our position is by its very nature top trumps, we are not fighting the battles that also underpin that sense of superiority. We should come down like a ton of bricks on one gender having superiority over another, of one sexuality domain over another, of one religion being top God. And we acquiesce in these outrages to our own sensibilities, because, "Oh well, other people have other views...."
And so we have the appalling spectacle of, for example, sexual apartheid happily enforced in Labour Party meetings. As a consequence, people who would supposedly die in a ditch for sexual equality look the other way. They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
And in doing this, they show they actually stand for nothing. Their standards are not universal, to be held aloft as being the best we should ALL aim to be. They are a pick and mix of options, not universal truths to be upheld at all cost.
We need to grow a spine and call out the utterly unacceptable. Why should I HAVE to live in a society that quietly appeases the gross, the ghastly, the shameful?
Mr. Dromedary, because if people will alter even the name of the calendar system simply to impose their own modern secularism upon a religious, historical system then I find it hard to trust they'll be able to view anything else historical objectively.
Not to mention, it's the Christian calendar. Is anyone wanting to call the Islamic calendar the Arabian calendar, or the Chinese New Year the Oriental New Year? Of course not. It's a stupid and pointless renaming of something to be politically correct.
On topic, it is worth noting that while there is a subset of Islamists amongst Western Muslims, for many (like TSE) it is a cultural heritage rather than the main driver in their motivations. The alternative to SeanT's febrile apocalyptic talk is rather more dull. 48% of British Muslims never attend mosque, for example, and in Saudi a higher percentage of the population self describe as athiests than do Americans.
Because she's worried that if all of the targeted countries impose similar bans on US citizens then Boris Johnson might find there are several countries he's not allowed to go to?
I thought he had renounced his US citizenship? Shame really: we could have sent him over to take on Trump...
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Why did a technologically superior civilisation lose its commanding lead?
(This question is often posed in the writings of the only Islamic winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics. He gives no good answer, but I think the answer is clear).
What do you think it is, in a sentence or two?
I think it's that the European rulers were so greedy that they were committed to investing a part of the surplus so as to increase the stock of what they ruled over and, in fact, the size of the surplus too, whereas the Muslim rulers lived it up on almost all of the surplus. The hypocritical dead-lettering of what was supposed to be a Christian ban on usury also helped.
That's a good point. The Mongols were highly advanced at psychological warfare, much more so than their opponents, but couldn't rule over conquered territories in the long term.
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
We already have a de facto blasphemy law. Which protects Islam. See the gymnast who was banned for the most minor mockery of Muslim prayer. Nothing would have happened if he'd mocked a vicar.
When was the last time you saw a comedy show laughing at the Prophet, making an obscene joke about the Koran, etc? Clue: never.
That's with a Muslim population around 5% of the whole. Imagine how different our society will be when we reach 10%, 20%. Etc.
Why are liberals so fucking stupid? Is it in the job description?
We liberals are really stupid because we don't agree with you Sean.
Your faith in western values can't be that strong if you think 10 or 20% of a population being Muslim is enough to get rid of them.
On the comedy point... M personal theory is that these days people are uncomfortable laughing at minority groups. They are more comfortable if it's someone from the minority group making the jokes but even then it can be shaky ground.
You don't see many comedians cracking jokes about Jews either... Partly as people don't want to be a racist... And partly because I don't think people actually know that much about Judaism to guarantee a laugh.
I think Omid Djalili has done some funny stuff on Islam.
Has Farage spooked two Prime Ministers in a row into making colossal misjudgements?
Yes.The power that man wields over the Tory party is extraordinary. It must be because the more vocable and excitable wing of Toryism - the part an earnestly pragmatic leadership will always fear - has more affinity with UKIP and its heady populism and quick fixes. I think there's an element of envy too: 'Look at that Nigel, saying the things we've always wanted to say but never been allowed. If only we could be like him.' Nigel is the promised land for restless Tories . That was always going to cause tensions.
I suspect that you have greater insight to offer this board on the Kalasha goat-herds of the Hindu Kush than you have on the Conservative Party. And I will be happy to acknowledge that you have never seen a goat - or a mountain.
Because she's worried that if all of the targeted countries impose similar bans on US citizens then Boris Johnson might find there are several countries he's not allowed to go to?
We need to keep quiet about that. If any of those countries find out, they'll impose such a ban just to spite us. Of course, it will immediately be followed with special exemption for Boris out of 'diplomatic respect and responsibility', but that will only add to our embarrassment.
Mr. M, not sure that's entirely true. Certainly in cannon technology, the Turks led the field, centuries after Khan rampaged across the world. Indeed, that's how Byzantium's famous walls were finally overcome.
Islamic civilisation in Central Asia and Afghanistan never really recovered from the Mongols. The destruction of people, cities, irrigation systems was immense. Hulegu Khan also did immense damage in what is now Iraq. Had he defeated the Mameluks, it's quite possible that Islam would have vanished from the Middle East (he strongly favoured Nestorian Christianity). The Islamic world was left feeling embattled, and much of its former tolerance disappeared.
An excellent thread, which seems to have engaged pb.com minds in real thought and debate after the stale nonsense of Trump and May and State visits.
Our western liberal governments have held it up as a sign of our systemic superiority that we are prepared to tolerate the intolerant. Which is a view; but in sitting back with a smug self-satisfaction that our position is by its very nature top trumps, we are not fighting the battles that also underpin that sense of superiority. We should come down like a ton of bricks on one gender having superiority over another, of one sexuality domain over another, of one religion being top God. And we acquiesce in these outrages to our own sensibilities, because, "Oh well, other people have other views...."
And so we have the appalling spectacle of, for example, sexual apartheid happily enforced in Labour Party meetings. As a consequence, people who would supposedly die in a ditch for sexual equality look the other way. They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
And in doing this, they show they actually stand for nothing. Their standards are not universal, to be held aloft as being the best we should ALL aim to be. They are a pick and mix of options, not universal truths to be upheld at all cost.
We need to grow a spine and call out the utterly unacceptable. Why should I HAVE to live in a society that quietly appeases the gross, the ghastly, the shameful?
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
We already have a de facto blasphemy law. Which protects Islam. See the gymnast who was banned for the most minor mockery of Muslim prayer. Nothing would have happened if he'd mocked a vicar.
When was the last time you saw a comedy show laughing at the Prophet, making an obscene joke about the Koran, etc? Clue: never.
That's with a Muslim population around 5% of the whole. Imagine how different our society will be when we reach 10%, 20%. Etc.
Why are liberals so fucking stupid? Is it in the job description?
We liberals are really stupid because we don't agree with you Sean.
Your faith in western values can't be that strong if you think 10 or 20% of a population being Muslim is enough to get rid of them.
On the comedy point... M personal theory is that these days people are uncomfortable laughing at minority groups. They are more comfortable if it's someone from the minority group making the jokes but even then it can be shaky ground.
You don't see many comedians cracking jokes about Jews either... Partly as people don't want to be a racist... And partly because I don't think people actually know that much about Judaism to guarantee a laugh.
I think Omid Djalili has done some funny stuff on Islam.
Citizen Khan's depiction of WWC as dopey pissheads is probably playing on a stereotype.. racial stereotyping in comedy isn't dead!
They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
What's your line on London's illegal Orthodox Jewish schools?
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
I was about to write that nobody was bothered about Clinton getting more votes than Obama in the 2008 Democrat primary but Wikipedia has Obama getting more votes. I was sure I'd seen on here that Clinton got more votes.
On topic, it is worth noting that while there is a subset of Islamists amongst Western Muslims, for many (like TSE) it is a cultural heritage rather than the main driver in their motivations. The alternative to SeanT's febrile apocalyptic talk is rather more dull. 48% of British Muslims never attend mosque, for example, and in Saudi a higher percentage of the population self describe as athiests than do Americans.
That is not to ignore Islamist terrorism and radicalisation as an issue, but we should keep it in proportion.
I am surprised it is as high as 48%. Most Muslims men do attend the two annual Eid prayers but that's about it. Probably 48% attend the Friday prayers.
Barely 48 hours ago, this drivel came out of May. This hapless woman, who needs to be seen as important, is becoming an embarrassment.
Her political judgement is poor. This is not just about playing the factions in the Tory party.
You may not like it but May was quite right to build a relationship with the most powerful man in the world and the Head of State of the largest national destination for UK exports
And, yes, the key problem in liberal western circles is their feeble understanding of the power of religion. The solace of faith. Liberal lefties are all helpless, decomposing atheists. They think everyone else feels the same anomie and ennui as them, or will come to feel it, once they've bought enough 3D TV's
THEY WON'T
I only have to look at, say, Paris, Paris, Rotherham, Nice or New York to have a very strong understanding of the power of religion. It's very GK Chesterton to ascribe atheism to ennui and anomie rather than - correctly - to common sense.
At some stage Islam will grow out of itself in the same way Christianity has in the first world, where sophisticated clerics describe the faith as a metaphor, and nobody has been judicially burned alive for ages. We must just hope this happens sooner rather than later.
"At some stage Islam will grow out of itself in the same way Christianity has in the first world"
Correct.
Can you give us an ETA on Islamic Enlightenment? Next Tuesday? 2029? When can we expect this?
I think that requires a definition of Enlightenment.
It might also be interesting to hear the date that you suggest Western Europe achieved Enlightenment by that same definition.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
I was about to write that nobody was bothered about Clinton getting more votes than Obama in the 2008 Democrat primary but Wikipedia has Obama getting more votes. I was sure I'd seen on here that Clinton got more votes.
Including Michigan and Florida yes but both state's votes did not count for disobeying the DNC and drontloading their primaries
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
And, yes, the key problem in liberal western circles is their feeble understanding of the power of religion. The solace of faith. Liberal lefties are all helpless, decomposing atheists. They think everyone else feels the same anomie and ennui as them, or will come to feel it, once they've bought enough 3D TV's
THEY WON'T
I only have to look at, say, Paris, Paris, Rotherham, Nice or New York to have a very strong understanding of the power of religion. It's very GK Chesterton to ascribe atheism to ennui and anomie rather than - correctly - to common sense.
At some stage Islam will grow out of itself in the same way Christianity has in the first world, where sophisticated clerics describe the faith as a metaphor, and nobody has been judicially burned alive for ages. We must just hope this happens sooner rather than later.
"At some stage Islam will grow out of itself in the same way Christianity has in the first world"
Correct.
Can you give us an ETA on Islamic Enlightenment? Next Tuesday? 2029? When can we expect this?
I think that requires a definition of Enlightenment.
It might also be interesting to hear the date that you suggest Western Europe achieved Enlightenment by that same definition.
Ireland probably didn't become enlightened until the 1980s.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
I was about to write that nobody was bothered about Clinton getting more votes than Obama in the 2008 Democrat primary but Wikipedia has Obama getting more votes. I was sure I'd seen on here that Clinton got more votes.
Including Michigan and Florida yes but both state's votes did not count for disobeying the DNC and drontloading their primaries
Did they do that to help Clinton? Or just to try and give their votes more prominence?
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
We already have a de facto blasphemy law. Which protects Islam. See the gymnast who was banned for the most minor mockery of Muslim prayer. Nothing would have happened if he'd mocked a vicar.
When was the last time you saw a comedy show laughing at the Prophet, making an obscene joke about the Koran, etc? Clue: never.
That's with a Muslim population around 5% of the whole. Imagine how different our society will be when we reach 10%, 20%. Etc.
Why are liberals so fucking stupid? Is it in the job description?
We liberals are really stupid because we don't agree with you Sean.
Your faith in western values can't be that strong if you think 10 or 20% of a population being Muslim is enough to get rid of them.
On the comedy point... M personal theory is that these days people are uncomfortable laughing at minority groups. They are more comfortable if it's someone from the minority group making the jokes but even then it can be shaky ground.
You don't see many comedians cracking jokes about Jews either... Partly as people don't want to be a racist... And partly because I don't think people actually know that much about Judaism to guarantee a laugh.
I think Omid Djalili has done some funny stuff on Islam.
Citizen Khan's depiction of WWC as dopey pissheads is probably playing on a stereotype.. racial stereotyping in comedy isn't dead!
Don't find citizen khan funny at all... Racial stereotyping in comedy is going strong... But I do think people get bored of it. Jokes about Irish drinks or Welsh and sheep get dull after a while.
Mr. M, not sure that's entirely true. Certainly in cannon technology, the Turks led the field, centuries after Khan rampaged across the world. Indeed, that's how Byzantium's famous walls were finally overcome.
I think my point (as others have alluded), it was more a shattering of Islamic self confidence (in much the same way as the Israelites after Sargon), and the destruction of the great Persian centres of learning. As Sean_F says, the destruction of the qanats was an almost mortal blow.
There was always a fundamentalist and intolerant side to Islam (witness the possibly apocryphal story about the burning of the Alexandrian library), as well as a scholarly and erudite strand. I don't think that's particularly unusual or unique to Islam; we can see similar splits in Christian society during the Renaissance.
The Ottomans are inexplicable, though as I think you mentioned the other day, they nearly came a cropper when Timur decided to pay a visit.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
So what? The seats you cite may very well exhibit among the highest levels of education in the country too. Most likely (I have not checked) there is a correlation between being bright and being deeply uncomfortable with the idea of Trumpton waving his small hands around The Mall.
There's a correlation between people in left wing middle class constituencies signing left wing petitions.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Yes, London has an above average percentage of graduates and its working class population is now mainly ethnic minority, the white working class has moved to Essex and Kent
Trump says that he is most concerned about people from states where the Sharia religion is dominant rather than the Sunni religion.
This means Saudi Arabia citizens are exempt from the extra vetting procedures whilst Iranian and Iraqi visitors are not exempt as they have Sharia majorities.
@David_Evershed - A word to the wise: you are mixing things up awfully badly here. Some pointers:
* sharia is Islamic religious law, * the two main denominations of Islam are Sunni (most Arab Muslims follow this, as do the vast majority of Muslims in Pakistan, Indonesia. etc.) and Shia (big in Iraq, also in Bahrain - but not in the ruling elite there - and in the non-Arab countries Iran and Azerbaijan, and observed by minorities in Lebanon, Kuwait, and non-Arab Turkey and Pakistan) * the large majority of Muslims are Sunni * both Sunni and Shia have branches * by far the biggest branch of Shia is the Twelvers; next are the Ismailis, led by the Aga Khan * there is a minority branch of Sunni called Salafism, for which Wahhabism is a near-synonym * Daesh (ISIS), Al-Qaeda and the Saudi regime are all Salafist * some Salafists believe that all Shiites should be killed
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Excluding California he won the popular vote
The awkward truth is that it is likely that the majority of votes cast were AGAINST Clinton or Trump rather than FOR them. If there was an option on the ballot paper that said neither of these, give us two more acceptable candidates, then that option would probably have won.
Mr. M, not sure that's entirely true. Certainly in cannon technology, the Turks led the field, centuries after Khan rampaged across the world. Indeed, that's how Byzantium's famous walls were finally overcome.
I think my point (as others have alluded), it was more a shattering of Islamic self confidence (in much the same way as the Israelites after Sargon), and the destruction of the great Persian centres of learning. As Sean_F says, the destruction of the qanats was an almost mortal blow.
There was always a fundamentalist and intolerant side to Islam (witness the possibly apocryphal story about the burning of the Alexandrian library), as well as a scholarly and erudite strand. I don't think that's particularly unusual or unique to Islam; we can see similar splits in Christian society during the Renaissance.
The Ottomans are inexplicable, though as I think you mentioned the other day, they nearly came a cropper when Timur decided to pay a visit.
I don't think the Ottomans were especially advanced, either in terms of learning, or technologically, but they were very well organised for war.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
I was about to write that nobody was bothered about Clinton getting more votes than Obama in the 2008 Democrat primary but Wikipedia has Obama getting more votes. I was sure I'd seen on here that Clinton got more votes.
Including Michigan and Florida yes but both state's votes did not count for disobeying the DNC and drontloading their primaries
Did they do that to help Clinton? Or just to try and give their votes more prominence?
Mr. M, if someone wrote a fantasy story and had something like Tamerlane saving the day randomly, it'd get called out as a wholly unrealistic deus ex machina.
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
You think the Tories had a majority of the vote then, elected by a very small minority of the vote.
They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
What's your line on London's illegal Orthodox Jewish schools?
If they are illegal, then I would force them to comply with the law. I assume that would be politically troublesome though.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Excluding California he won the popular vote
The awkward truth is that it is likely that the majority of votes cast were AGAINST Clinton or Trump rather than FOR them. If there was an option on the ballot paper that said neither of these, give us two more acceptable candidates, then that option would probably have won.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Excluding California he won the popular vote
The awkward truth is that it is likely that the majority of votes cast were AGAINST Clinton or Trump rather than FOR them. If there was an option on the ballot paper that said neither of these, give us two more acceptable candidates, then that option would probably have won.
Maybe but it was Democratic and Republican primary voters who picked the candidates
@NicolaSturgeon: For those asking my view on US State visit: would be wrong for it to go ahead while bans on refugees & citizens of some countries in place.
Trump says that he is most concerned about people from states where the Sharia religion is dominant rather than the Sunni religion.
This means Saudi Arabia citizens are exempt from the extra vetting procedures whilst Iranian and Iraqi visitors are not exempt as they have Sharia majorities.
@David_Evershed - A word to the wise: you are mixing things up awfully badly here. Some pointers:
* sharia is Islamic religious law, * the two main denominations of Islam are Sunni (most Arab Muslims follow this, as do the vast majority of Muslims in Pakistan, Indonesia. etc.) and Shia (big in Iraq, also in Bahrain - but not in the ruling elite there - and in the non-Arab countries Iran and Azerbaijan, and observed by minorities in Lebanon, Kuwait, and non-Arab Turkey and Pakistan) * the large majority of Muslims are Sunni * both Sunni and Shia have branches * by far the biggest branch of Shia is the Twelvers; next are the Ismailis, led by the Aga Khan * there is a minority branch of Sunni called Salafism, for which Wahhabism is a near-synonym * Daesh (ISIS), Al-Qaeda and the Saudi regime are all Salafist * some Salafists believe that all Shiites should be killed
* Donald Trump does not do much business in the seven countries to which the ban applies
Trumps immigration restrictions are directed at
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Are they not all primarily Shia supporting not Sunni?
No they aren't. Your theory is mistaken. The large majority of Muslims in Syria and the whole of North Africa including Libya are Sunni. Same is true in Somalia and Sudan.
Iran is Shia; Iraq mostly so; Yemen has a small Sunni majority but is almost half-and-half.
@SeanT - I didn't know Azerbaijan was the birthplace of Zoroastrianism. I wonder whether the burning mountain has something to do with that, given the importance of fire in that religion?
What we really miss from the EU is our shared values. Knowing that all of 27 of the most cultured countries of the world don't hang flog or abuse human rights is a nice club to belong to.
The first time I went to Miami in 1980 the racism was tangible. Much more so than South Africa which I visited ten years later.
To believe we share a culture with the US is as insulting as it would be to suggest the Dutch share one with the Afrikaners
Trump says that he is most concerned about people from states where the Sharia religion is dominant rather than the Sunni religion.
This means Saudi Arabia citizens are exempt from the extra vetting procedures whilst Iranian and Iraqi visitors are not exempt as they have Sharia majorities.
You have got the "S"'s confused, my dear ! Saudi Arabia is the most Sharia country in the world. I think you meant to say Shia.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Yes, London has an above average percentage of graduates and its working class population is now mainly ethnic minority, the white working class has moved to Essex and Kent
That's pretty accurate.
Yougov sampled London in the run up to Brexit:
Londoners who feel British or English: 59% (identical across all socio-economic groups) Labour voters who feel British or English: 52% (the only below average party ID) Remainers who feel British or English: 49% 18-24 year olds who feel British or English: 42%
27% of under 25s didn't regard themselves as British, English or even Londoners. One in four do not even believe they belong to the city, let alone the country.
Mr. T, point of order: that's partly a function of Israel's stupid PR system that has either minority governments or unstable, broad governments full of pork barrel-scraping. Shiron was going to change it and likely could've, but he got struck down by that stroke, and the system stayed.
What we really miss from the EU is our shared values. Knowing that all of 27 of the most cultured countries of the world don't hang flog or abuse human rights is a nice club to belong to.
The first time I went to Miami in 1980 the racism was tangible. Much more so than South Africa which I visited ten years later.
To believe we share a culture with the US is as insulting as it would be to suggest the Dutch share one with the Afrikaners
I would suggest you haven't travelled much in Bavaria, provincial Spain, southern Italy and Eastern Europe then. Culturally most of the U.S. has more in common with the UK than those areas and certainly the East and West coasts
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
Elected according to the rules of the election.
I.e. by a majority of the 538 electors Just for the record, because I've met a few people who are getting this wrong: Clinton also won a minority of the votes cast, just a bigger minority than Trump's.
Yes that is true: she won a plularity
You will actually find she won zilch , nada , nothing. She lost.
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
52% voted to leave the EU!
15% of our population are never going to vote for sharia. And if they did...You think the 85% who don't want it are just going to standby and watch?
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
Indeed. See Israel for another example, bedevilled by mad far right settler racist parties that weild disproportionate power under their electoral system. Forcing Israeli politics to the right.
It is arguable that without them Israel would now be at peace, and the entire bloody world a happier place.
Israel = 20,000 sq. km (about the size of Wales) Arab League states = 14,000,000 sq. km (a bit smaller than Russia)
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
Indeed. See Israel for another example, bedevilled by mad far right settler racist parties that weild disproportionate power under their electoral system. Forcing Israeli politics to the right.
It is arguable that without them Israel would now be at peace, and the entire bloody world a happier place.
Israel = 20,000 sq. km (about the size of Wales) Arab League states = 14,000,000 sq. km (a bit smaller than Russia)
Number of Palestinian refugees: 4 million. Are you doing hasbara or what? As for the Arab League, it is a pathetic organisation. How has it responded to Trump's ban, for instance? If it wanted to smash ISIS, it very probably could.
Trump says that he is most concerned about people from states where the Sharia religion is dominant rather than the Sunni religion.
This means Saudi Arabia citizens are exempt from the extra vetting procedures whilst Iranian and Iraqi visitors are not exempt as they have Sharia majorities.
@David_Evershed - A word to the wise: you are mixing things up awfully badly here. Some pointers:
* sharia is Islamic religious law, * the two main denominations of Islam are Sunni (most Arab Muslims follow this, as do the vast majority of Muslims in Pakistan, Indonesia. etc.) and Shia (big in Iraq, also in Bahrain - but not in the ruling elite there - and in the non-Arab countries Iran and Azerbaijan, and observed by minorities in Lebanon, Kuwait, and non-Arab Turkey and Pakistan) * the large majority of Muslims are Sunni * both Sunni and Shia have branches * by far the biggest branch of Shia is the Twelvers; next are the Ismailis, led by the Aga Khan * there is a minority branch of Sunni called Salafism, for which Wahhabism is a near-synonym * Daesh (ISIS), Al-Qaeda and the Saudi regime are all Salafist * some Salafists believe that all Shiites should be killed
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Far fairer than our system where you can be in charge with 3 out of 10 votes.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Yes, London has an above average percentage of graduates and its working class population is now mainly ethnic minority, the white working class has moved to Essex and Kent
That's pretty accurate.
Yougov sampled London in the run up to Brexit:
Londoners who feel British or English: 59% (identical across all socio-economic groups) Labour voters who feel British or English: 52% (the only below average party ID) Remainers who feel British or English: 49% 18-24 year olds who feel British or English: 42%
27% of under 25s didn't regard themselves as British, English or even Londoners. One in four do not even believe they belong to the city, let alone the country.
London, certainly inner London, is now basically an international city much like New York and with a large percentage of the City's population born abroad
What we really miss from the EU is our shared values. Knowing that all of 27 of the most cultured countries of the world don't hang flog or abuse human rights is a nice club to belong to.
The first time I went to Miami in 1980 the racism was tangible. Much more so than South Africa which I visited ten years later.
To believe we share a culture with the US is as insulting as it would be to suggest the Dutch share one with the Afrikaners
I would suggest you haven't travelled much in Bavaria, provincial Spain, southern Italy and Eastern Europe then. Culturally most of the U.S. has more in common with the UK than those areas and certainly the East and West coasts
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
Free speech is one area which has been successfully attacked by Islamic fundamentalists. This is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms. Hence my concern.
The impression I've gained from the odd conversation is that most people are a little bemused by Trump. Yes, the daft executive order looks well over the top, but it's what the Septics voted for. I suspect it will be modified fast enough.
Perhaps I should join twitter and learn to emote a lot more. Perhaps raise a petition against gravity. Do you know how dangerous that is? Something must be done about it. Come on, get on your arse and sign something on the internet. Or go the whole hog and march against it.
I don't think it was anything special for the time.
I'd say their success was more down to superb organisation and fighting quality. They had the bureaucracy to put very big armies and navies into the field very rapidly, and the Jannissaries were excellent fighting men.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
It's not an 'awkward truth': it's the way the system works. All electoral systems can throw up odd results: it's for parties and individuals to legally make the most of the system.
And this is where Clinton failed. She racked up massive levels of votes in some states, but not enough in others. Her campaign fundamentally mucked up in calculating how to get the result they wanted from the system.
Trump and the Republicans did much better in this, although far from perfectly.
What we really miss from the EU is our shared values. Knowing that all of 27 of the most cultured countries of the world don't hang flog or abuse human rights is a nice club to belong to.
The first time I went to Miami in 1980 the racism was tangible. Much more so than South Africa which I visited ten years later.
To believe we share a culture with the US is as insulting as it would be to suggest the Dutch share one with the Afrikaners
I would suggest you haven't travelled much in Bavaria, provincial Spain, southern Italy and Eastern Europe then. Culturally most of the U.S. has more in common with the UK than those areas and certainly the East and West coasts
Which parts of the USA have you experienced?
Texas, Pennsylvania, Virginia, California, New Jersey and New York and DC
On topic, it is worth noting that while there is a subset of Islamists amongst Western Muslims, for many (like TSE) it is a cultural heritage rather than the main driver in their motivations. The alternative to SeanT's febrile apocalyptic talk is rather more dull. 48% of British Muslims never attend mosque, for example, and in Saudi a higher percentage of the population self describe as athiests than do Americans.
That is not to ignore Islamist terrorism and radicalisation as an issue, but we should keep it in proportion.
I am surprised it is as high as 48%. Most Muslims men do attend the two annual Eid prayers but that's about it. Probably 48% attend the Friday prayers.
Nope. 48% of British Muslims say they never attend a mosque. 6% more only ever attend on special occasions, only a minority support sharia law, and for many of these it is over unremarkeable civil matters like inheritance.
They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
What's your line on London's illegal Orthodox Jewish schools?
If they are illegal, then I would force them to comply with the law. I assume that would be politically troublesome though.
That is the issue in this country with all these minorities, the authorities are scared to upset them. Hence the country is a sh****le with people tippy toeing around minorities and ignoring the majority.
I really don't see the crisis for freedom of thought. After the challenges of communism and fascism, religious fundamentalism looks pretty small beer, certainly as compared with previous incarnations of the same phenomenon. Unless we choose to let ourselves be spooked, in which case we really do have a crisis.
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
Indeed. See Israel for another example, bedevilled by mad far right settler racist parties that weild disproportionate power under their electoral system. Forcing Israeli politics to the right.
It is arguable that without them Israel would now be at peace, and the entire bloody world a happier place.
Israel = 20,000 sq. km (about the size of Wales) Arab League states = 14,000,000 sq. km (a bit smaller than Russia)
I'm not sure what your point is? Should we re-settle the Israelis in Wales? It always seems pretty uninhabited but the weather's a bit crap
They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
What's your line on London's illegal Orthodox Jewish schools?
If they are illegal, then I would force them to comply with the law. I assume that would be politically troublesome though.
They are not all illegal, but some of them are. In Hackney, most of them are. Some try to stop pupils speaking English.
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
Free speech is one area which has been successfully attacked by Islamic fundamentalists. This is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms. Hence my concern.
We have freedom of speech here in the UK.
To the extent to which we have placed limitations on it... Like libel or hate speech - it's not because Islamic fundamentalists wanted it. Indeed the restrictions on hate speech are very often what we use to go after fundamentalists.
I should add (edit) - I thought it was an nteresting and thoughtful header.
On topic, it is worth noting that while there is a subset of Islamists amongst Western Muslims, and for many (like TSE) it is a cultural heritage rather than the main driver in their motivations. The alternative to SeanT's febrile apocalyptic talk is rather more dull. 48% of British Muslims never attend mosque, for example, and in Saudi a higher percentage of the population self describe as athiests than do Americans.
That is not to ignore Islamist terrorism and radicalisation as an issue, but we should keep it in proportion.
How many Germans self identified as Nazis? How many went to the Nuremberg rallies, or read Mein Kampf, or joined Hitler Youth?
Not many in the scheme of things. But enough to cause a world war.
Hitler Jugend membership was compulsory. That's why Benedict XVI was a member of them despite coming from an anti-Nazi family.
Many German people did identify as Nazis because of the way Hitler merged Nazism and the state. In fact, Hitler had (strangely) fewer strikes to face than Churchill did during the war - Tim Mason thought this was due to the sophistication of Nazi terror organisations e.g. The Gestapo, but knowing what we do now about their weakness and inefficiency that explanation doesn't stack up.
The really difficult truth for many Germans after the war wa Stuart the had bought in heavily to Hitler's vision because superficially it was successful, and then carried on to the hideous end (Hitler didn't kill a single Jew personally, remember).
Muslims of course also have to face awkward questions about the support for radical groups. I have not forgotten the shock and horror on Arafat's face as he condemned 9/11. But unswerving Republican support for Israel since is in no small part based on those memories of cheering crowds in Ramallah and Nablus beforehand.
The sad fact is that people are like sheep. We follow whoever we think is on our side and gives a strong lead. That applies to Soviet citizens under Stalin or Muslims under Wahhabism. If we could truly all think and act independently, just think how different the world would be.
@NicolaSturgeon: For those asking my view on US State visit: would be wrong for it to go ahead while bans on refugees & citizens of some countries in place.
Cue fawning Zoomers in 5,4,3...
Now Scotland is going to hell in a wheelbarrow, Sturgeon aping the Tories, pathetic.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
So what? The seats you cite may very well exhibit among the highest levels of education in the country too. Most likely (I have not checked) there is a correlation between being bright and being deeply uncomfortable with the idea of Trumpton waving his small hands around The Mall.
There's a correlation between people in left wing middle class constituencies signing left wing petitions.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Yes, London has an above average percentage of graduates and its working class population is now mainly ethnic minority, the white working class has moved to Essex and Kent
That's pretty accurate.
Yougov sampled London in the run up to Brexit:
Londoners who feel British or English: 59% (identical across all socio-economic groups) Labour voters who feel British or English: 52% (the only below average party ID) Remainers who feel British or English: 49% 18-24 year olds who feel British or English: 42%
27% of under 25s didn't regard themselves as British, English or even Londoners. One in four do not even believe they belong to the city, let alone the country.
Good for them. We are better as a species when we are less tribal
They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
What's your line on London's illegal Orthodox Jewish schools?
If they are illegal, then I would force them to comply with the law. I assume that would be politically troublesome though.
These schools are not illegal.
However, Judaism has so much in common with Islam (circumcision, dietary laws, separate religious courts for divorce etc.), together with the shared belief that religious laws should govern the whole of one's life, means that any restrictions designed to selectively discriminate against Muslims would effectively catch Jews in the same net.
Jews as well as Muslims, living in Christian lands, are effectively living between 2 worlds, with each individual on a spectrum between assimilation and an almost separate existence. In some ways, the West's recent reversion to more pagan values has accentuated the difference of views, for example on abortion and sodomy.
Mr. rkrkrk, after the furore over Danish cartoons in 2005, how many newspapers here reprinted them?
Mr. Meeks, excessive tolerance of non-British cultures is partially to blame for the prolonged delay in anything being done about the widespread sexual crimes in Rotherham.
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
Yes, but it put forward a plausible enough scenario that he and his book were engulfed in controversy as a result.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
Indeed. See Israel for another example, bedevilled by mad far right settler racist parties that weild disproportionate power under their electoral system. Forcing Israeli politics to the right.
It is arguable that without them Israel would now be at peace, and the entire bloody world a happier place.
Israel = 20,000 sq. km (about the size of Wales) Arab League states = 14,000,000 sq. km (a bit smaller than Russia)
I'm not sure what your point is? Should we re-settle the Israelis in Wales? It always seems pretty uninhabited but the weather's a bit crap
I have taken to saying "about the size of the Peloponnese", which is just fractionally bigger. And as you say, sunnier.
Also Ruth Davidson from the limited amount I see is very impressive.
You must not see much then.
To be fair Mg in York we do not see much of Scottish Politics. I see Angus Robertson at Pmqs .Wish he had more than two questions as he is very good .
York , most are as mediocre as Westminster unfortunately. The dire opposition is also turning the SNP's brains to mush as they do not have to think about anything. It is dire.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
It's not an 'awkward truth': it's the way the system works. All electoral systems can throw up odd results: it's for parties and individuals to legally make the most of the system.
And this is where Clinton failed. She racked up massive levels of votes in some states, but not enough in others. Her campaign fundamentally mucked up in calculating how to get the result they wanted from the system.
Trump and the Republicans did much better in this, although far from perfectly.
The failure is Clinton's and the Democrats.
More than that, it wasn't just a quirk. The ECV system was designed to prevent a candidate piling up votes in a few states to win, so they are forced to appeal to a broader range of states. The fact that Trump won was not a failure, or an odd outcome; it functioned as expected.
"Fundamentalist Islam does pose a threat to Western liberal democracies. Pretending that this is not so is foolish."
What is the threat? That the UK or USA will become fundamentalist Islamic countries? That seems absurd. We are never going to vote to become an Islamic theocracy.
That we will be attacked by fundamentalist terrorists? This is undoubtedly true - but I think we have to rely on our security services, with the collaboration of the Muslim community, to do their jobs.
The UK's system of laws, democracy, free speech, habeus corpus etc. are not going to be destroyed by some pathetic terrorist groups from the Middle East who think the world is going to become an Islamic caliphate.
The risk is that we will dismantle our protections and rights because we are scared. We shouldn't be so scared. Democracy is better and we will win.
Free speech is one area which has been successfully attacked by Islamic fundamentalists. This is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms. Hence my concern.
Yes. Good things usually end with a whimper, not a bang. If our free speech, the rule of law etc. come to an end, it won't be at the hands of dictators, but rather at the hands of "moderates" who are desperate to avoid giving offence to extremists.
I am with Dizzy on this petition. It is telling me I have already signed when that is untrue.
Either the thing is being manipulated or the system is not working as it should.
It's because some people are sharing a link with their own session id in the URL so it shows that it's been signed already. It doesn't mean the count is dodgy.
The link is a couple of hours old so the session id - and I couldn't obviously see one on the link - should have expired.
Can we also have petitions to end state visits by Putin, the President of China and the King of Saudi Arabia too then?
Why don't you start one. You are allowed to, you know.
I have no interest in signing petitions against state visits by a Head of State, including Trump, demonstrate by all means but don't ban. However it is rather ironic that the biggest petition against a state visit by a Head of State is against a democratically elected leader rather than someone who is effectively a dictator!
'Elected' by a clear minority of those who voted - tyranny of the minority in Trumpton's case I suppose.
By the system as laid down in the US Constitution. States elect presidents, not the voters.
Yes I am quite aware how the Electoral College works thanks. However, it's an awkward truth that more than two million more people voted against him than for him.
Far fairer than our system where you can be in charge with 3 out of 10 votes.
True, I suppose - the last time a party got 50% of the vote, and the only time in the age of universal suffrage, was in 1931.
But it is rare for parties to lose the vote and win the seat count - it has in fact only happened twice since 1945. It is democracy, of an imperfect sort.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
Hornsey Tottenham Walthamstow Hackney N Hackney S Islington S Islington N Poplar Holborn Hampstead Ealing C Tooting Streatham Dulwich Vauxhall Bermondsey Peckham Deptford Lewisham W Greenwich Hammersmith
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
So what? The seats you cite may very well exhibit among the highest levels of education in the country too. Most likely (I have not checked) there is a correlation between being bright and being deeply uncomfortable with the idea of Trumpton waving his small hands around The Mall.
There's a correlation between people in left wing middle class constituencies signing left wing petitions.
To highlight Labour's problems within London itself.
The highest 21 constituencies for signatories are Labour
as is the lowest, Dagenham, and five others (Barking, Edmonton, Feltham, Erith and Hayes) in the bottom ten.
Most of those seats have huge working class populations.
They aren't objecting to Trump because they are 'working class'.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Yes, London has an above average percentage of graduates and its working class population is now mainly ethnic minority, the white working class has moved to Essex and Kent
That's pretty accurate.
Yougov sampled London in the run up to Brexit:
Londoners who feel British or English: 59% (identical across all socio-economic groups) Labour voters who feel British or English: 52% (the only below average party ID) Remainers who feel British or English: 49% 18-24 year olds who feel British or English: 42%
27% of under 25s didn't regard themselves as British, English or even Londoners. One in four do not even believe they belong to the city, let alone the country.
Good for them. We are better as a species when we are less tribal
What?! It's not that we are less tribal it's that there are now competing tribes, that's the problem!
Trump says that he is most concerned about people from states where the Sharia religion is dominant rather than the Sunni religion.
This means Saudi Arabia citizens are exempt from the extra vetting procedures whilst Iranian and Iraqi visitors are not exempt as they have Sharia majorities.
@David_Evershed - A word to the wise: you are mixing things up awfully badly here. Some pointers:
* sharia is Islamic religious law, * the two main denominations of Islam are Sunni (most Arab Muslims follow this, as do the vast majority of Muslims in Pakistan, Indonesia. etc.) and Shia (big in Iraq, also in Bahrain - but not in the ruling elite there - and in the non-Arab countries Iran and Azerbaijan, and observed by minorities in Lebanon, Kuwait, and non-Arab Turkey and Pakistan) * the large majority of Muslims are Sunni * both Sunni and Shia have branches * by far the biggest branch of Shia is the Twelvers; next are the Ismailis, led by the Aga Khan * there is a minority branch of Sunni called Salafism, for which Wahhabism is a near-synonym * Daesh (ISIS), Al-Qaeda and the Saudi regime are all Salafist * some Salafists believe that all Shiites should be killed
Comments
"One of Europe's top hotels has admitted they had to pay thousands in Bitcoin ransom to cybercriminals who managed to hack their electronic key system, locking hundreds of guests in or out of their rooms until the money was paid.
http://www.thelocal.at/20170128/hotel-ransomed-by-hackers-as-guests-locked-in-rooms
Our western liberal governments have held it up as a sign of our systemic superiority that we are prepared to tolerate the intolerant. Which is a view; but in sitting back with a smug self-satisfaction that our position is by its very nature top trumps, we are not fighting the battles that also underpin that sense of superiority. We should come down like a ton of bricks on one gender having superiority over another, of one sexuality domain over another, of one religion being top God. And we acquiesce in these outrages to our own sensibilities, because, "Oh well, other people have other views...."
And so we have the appalling spectacle of, for example, sexual apartheid happily enforced in Labour Party meetings. As a consequence, people who would supposedly die in a ditch for sexual equality look the other way. They avert their eyes from the reality of barbaric genital mutilation, from "punishments" for sexual orientation, from a parallel legal system upholding standards that fly in the face of all that these western liberal governments profess to hold dear.
And in doing this, they show they actually stand for nothing. Their standards are not universal, to be held aloft as being the best we should ALL aim to be. They are a pick and mix of options, not universal truths to be upheld at all cost.
We need to grow a spine and call out the utterly unacceptable. Why should I HAVE to live in a society that quietly appeases the gross, the ghastly, the shameful?
Not to mention, it's the Christian calendar. Is anyone wanting to call the Islamic calendar the Arabian calendar, or the Chinese New Year the Oriental New Year? Of course not. It's a stupid and pointless renaming of something to be politically correct.
http://dougsaunders.net/2013/09/10-myths-about-muslim-immigrants-in-the-west/
That is not to ignore Islamist terrorism and radicalisation as an issue, but we should keep it in proportion.
Barely 48 hours ago, this drivel came out of May. This hapless woman, who needs to be seen as important, is becoming an embarrassment.
Her political judgement is poor. This is not just about playing the factions in the Tory party.
I think it's that the European rulers were so greedy that they were committed to investing a part of the surplus so as to increase the stock of what they ruled over and, in fact, the size of the surplus too, whereas the Muslim rulers lived it up on almost all of the surplus. The hypocritical dead-lettering of what was supposed to be a Christian ban on usury also helped. That's a good point. The Mongols were highly advanced at psychological warfare, much more so than their opponents, but couldn't rule over conquered territories in the long term.
Your faith in western values can't be that strong if you think 10 or 20% of a population being Muslim is enough to get rid of them.
On the comedy point... M personal theory is that these days people are uncomfortable laughing at minority groups. They are more comfortable if it's someone from the minority group making the jokes but even then it can be shaky ground.
You don't see many comedians cracking jokes about Jews either... Partly as people don't want to be a racist... And partly because I don't think people actually know that much about Judaism to guarantee a laugh.
I think Omid Djalili has done some funny stuff on Islam.
*throws roses on stage*
It might also be interesting to hear the date that you suggest Western Europe achieved Enlightenment by that same definition.
London is disproportionately full of people who struggle to regard themselves as British/English and houses greater concentrations of non British residents and people of dual nationality than anywhere else in the UK.
That gets reflected in one voting outcome (and petition) after another where people or issues are perceived to be hostile to their interests.
Racial stereotyping in comedy is going strong... But I do think people get bored of it.
Jokes about Irish drinks or Welsh and sheep get dull after a while.
There was always a fundamentalist and intolerant side to Islam (witness the possibly apocryphal story about the burning of the Alexandrian library), as well as a scholarly and erudite strand. I don't think that's particularly unusual or unique to Islam; we can see similar splits in Christian society during the Renaissance.
The Ottomans are inexplicable, though as I think you mentioned the other day, they nearly came a cropper when Timur decided to pay a visit.
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Are they not all primarily Shia supporting not Sunni?
Saudi Arabia is pro Sunni and not included in the restrictions.
Apart from the Arab Israeli conflict the wars in the Middle East are mostly Sunni suporters versus Shia supporters.
15% of the population voted UKIP and we left the EU. What starts to happen to our system when 15% of our population votes Sharia ? Its not about winning a majority to reform a nation, its about getting enough votes to worry existing parties into following their lead, first in small ways, and then in more blatant ways - salami tactics if you will.
The novel, in a UK context is a Sharia Party with 30 seats, and Labour being 20 seats short of forming a government with no other attractive options available.
Gary Johnson
Cue fawning Zoomers in 5,4,3...
Iran is Shia; Iraq mostly so; Yemen has a small Sunni majority but is almost half-and-half.
@SeanT - I didn't know Azerbaijan was the birthplace of Zoroastrianism. I wonder whether the burning mountain has something to do with that, given the importance of fire in that religion?
The first time I went to Miami in 1980 the racism was tangible. Much more so than South Africa which I visited ten years later.
To believe we share a culture with the US is as insulting as it would be to suggest the Dutch share one with the Afrikaners
The Ottomans (like most nomad and Turkic armies) weren't fussy about their soldiers' religions.
Yougov sampled London in the run up to Brexit:
Londoners who feel British or English: 59% (identical across all socio-economic groups)
Labour voters who feel British or English: 52% (the only below average party ID)
Remainers who feel British or English: 49%
18-24 year olds who feel British or English: 42%
27% of under 25s didn't regard themselves as British, English or even Londoners. One in four do not even believe they belong to the city, let alone the country.
15% of our population are never going to vote for sharia.
And if they did...You think the 85% who don't want it are just going to standby and watch?
It's just never going to happen.
Arab League states = 14,000,000 sq. km (a bit smaller than Russia)
Are you doing hasbara or what?
As for the Arab League, it is a pathetic organisation. How has it responded to Trump's ban, for instance? If it wanted to smash ISIS, it very probably could.
It is not dissimilar to the US list of State Sponsors (at some stage) of Terrorism:
Iran. (*)
Sudan. (*)
Syria. (*)
Cuba.
Iraq.
Libya.
North Korea.
South Yemen.
The others on the Rumpy-Trump list seem to be either failed states or places where Daesh has a current movement. I think.
Perhaps I should join twitter and learn to emote a lot more. Perhaps raise a petition against gravity. Do you know how dangerous that is? Something must be done about it. Come on, get on your arse and sign something on the internet. Or go the whole hog and march against it.
I'd say their success was more down to superb organisation and fighting quality. They had the bureaucracy to put very big armies and navies into the field very rapidly, and the Jannissaries were excellent fighting men.
https://twitter.com/francoisfillon/status/825740653149696000
And this is where Clinton failed. She racked up massive levels of votes in some states, but not enough in others. Her campaign fundamentally mucked up in calculating how to get the result they wanted from the system.
Trump and the Republicans did much better in this, although far from perfectly.
The failure is Clinton's and the Democrats.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/291
To the extent to which we have placed limitations on it... Like libel or hate speech - it's not because Islamic fundamentalists wanted it. Indeed the restrictions on hate speech are very often what we use to go after fundamentalists.
I should add (edit) - I thought it was an nteresting and thoughtful header.
Many German people did identify as Nazis because of the way Hitler merged Nazism and the state. In fact, Hitler had (strangely) fewer strikes to face than Churchill did during the war - Tim Mason thought this was due to the sophistication of Nazi terror organisations e.g. The Gestapo, but knowing what we do now about their weakness and inefficiency that explanation doesn't stack up.
The really difficult truth for many Germans after the war wa Stuart the had bought in heavily to Hitler's vision because superficially it was successful, and then carried on to the hideous end (Hitler didn't kill a single Jew personally, remember).
Muslims of course also have to face awkward questions about the support for radical groups. I have not forgotten the shock and horror on Arafat's face as he condemned 9/11. But unswerving Republican support for Israel since is in no small part based on those memories of cheering crowds in Ramallah and Nablus beforehand.
The sad fact is that people are like sheep. We follow whoever we think is on our side and gives a strong lead. That applies to Soviet citizens under Stalin or Muslims under Wahhabism. If we could truly all think and act independently, just think how different the world would be.
However, Judaism has so much in common with Islam (circumcision, dietary laws, separate religious courts for divorce etc.), together with the shared belief that religious laws should govern the whole of one's life, means that any restrictions designed to selectively discriminate against Muslims would effectively catch Jews in the same net.
Jews as well as Muslims, living in Christian lands, are effectively living between 2 worlds, with each individual on a spectrum between assimilation and an almost separate existence. In some ways, the West's recent reversion to more pagan values has accentuated the difference of views, for example on abortion and sodomy.
Mr. Meeks, excessive tolerance of non-British cultures is partially to blame for the prolonged delay in anything being done about the widespread sexual crimes in Rotherham.
More than that, it wasn't just a quirk. The ECV system was designed to prevent a candidate piling up votes in a few states to win, so they are forced to appeal to a broader range of states. The fact that Trump won was not a failure, or an odd outcome; it functioned as expected.
But it is rare for parties to lose the vote and win the seat count - it has in fact only happened twice since 1945. It is democracy, of an imperfect sort.