Mr. F, I was aware there was a liberal (in a religious sense) movement to restore worship of the Olympian gods, but I was unaware there was a political connection.
@Ed_Miliband: .@theresa_may You're the Prime Minister. Get on the phone to the President and tell him the ban cannot stand. And do it today.
and when Trump tells her to piss off, oh and by the way forget that trade deal we were talking about, then what ? Good old Ed, never much good at politics.
Of course. Trade deals are so much more important than human rights.
Central to our foreign policy.
If she says something or nothing it will make no difference to Trump, but one alternative costs us a trade deal.
Why do we want a trade deal at any cost? If we're happy to leave a single market over sovereignty, why is a sub-optimal agreement with Trump's America worth the price of a substantially diminished international reputation. UK soft power is (was?) one of our greatest assets.
Should we walk away from China given they hold 1200 political prisoners rather than seek a trade deal?
I am all for trade deals, but not ones of minor use done at the expense of the UK's reputation.
We don't know what the terms are yet, and if we going around grandstanding, we wont.
Not to mention that posturing impotently while Trump ignores us is not going to enhance our reputation.
They will be terms dictated by a man who bans MPs and knights of the realm from entering the US because he does not like where they were born.
Quite likely.
and the EU is looking for a trade deal with a country run by a real dictator that holds over a thousand political prisoners, I am not sure what your point is, realpolitik is about doing deals with unpleasant people, largely because if we dont someone else (probably also unpleasant) will, and the voters will want to know why.
My point is that no deal Trump dictates to us will be worth the harm to the UK's international reputation that fawning at his feet does. If a trade deal with the UK is in the US's interests Trump doesn't need a state visit. If it's not, what's the point? The EU is a big market that China will be prepared to offer concessions to in order to get a deal done.
I think you are overlooking how mind meltingly shallow Trump is, the state visit isn't about trade, he wants his picture taken with the Queen.
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
@GermanyDiplo: FMs @sigmargabriel+#Koenders: Are determined to secure the rights of our citizens+confer with #EU partners on necessary steps. #travelban
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
How can a regime that puts a white supremacist on the National Security Council and which consistently lies be trusted?
@GermanyDiplo: FMs @sigmargabriel+#Koenders: Are determined to secure the rights of our citizens+confer with #EU partners on necessary steps. #travelban
Wonder if Merkel is just getting put through to the white house answer phone?
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
How many States do candidates actually campaign in ? Who went to Alaska, Montana......California [ apart from fund raising ], New York, Texas last time in the Presidential election ? I could name another thirty states.
The system is thoroughly undemocratic in every way.
You would have exactly the same problem if it was popular vote - they would only visit the largest cities.
Also, on CA.. no doubt republican turnout is depressed since it's a shoe-in for the dems. You could say the same for TX, although that was mooted as being competitive this cycle.
TX will be competitive in 2020 and certainly in 2024 unless all the Hispanics are deported by then.
The Republicans do pretty well among Hispanic voters in Texas. The real battleground is College-educated Whites in the suburbs of Dallas, Houston, San Antonio. If the Republicans regain the level of support that Romney had with these voters, they'll win Texas very easily.
As an aside, the Executive Order is bad economics.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
How many States do candidates actually campaign in ? Who went to Alaska, Montana......California [ apart from fund raising ], New York, Texas last time in the Presidential election ? I could name another thirty states.
The system is thoroughly undemocratic in every way.
You would have exactly the same problem if it was popular vote - they would only visit the largest cities.
.
Which are spread through far more varied states than the stale retreaded swing states.
Mr. G, are you accusing Janus of being a Conservative?
There is actually a movement in Greece to restore worship of Zeus et al. It's very hard right.
Do they really believe Zeus and co exist? Or do they want them restored to bring back the 'tradition'?
Probably a mix of both, like Odinists in the US and Northern Europe. Basically, they think their respective peoples became a bunch of wusses, when they converted to Christianity. Whereas if you're a pagan, life is one long stag party.
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
So if we just send the 1% back to where they came from we won't have a problem at all.
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
These are just the numbers from wikipedia. For the other figures, I'm not sure, but it is clear that a higher proportion of Muslim countries (majority or plurality) do have anti-gay laws. I suspect a fair few of the 75 are remnants of British colonial laws.
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
How can a regime that puts a white supremacist on the National Security Council and which consistently lies be trusted?
Everybody lies these days, haven't you noticed. Trump and his cronies lie constantly, the media lies to suite their cause du jour, the EU lies the whole damn time, its the world we live in, yet we still need to function and make alliances of convenience. We just need to remember Palmerston's maxim.
As an aside, the Executive Order is bad economics.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
They have been a doing lot of the map stuff and add-ons to Gmail like calendar for a while there. Something like 700-800 people work there already.
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.
How many States do candidates actually campaign in ? Who went to Alaska, Montana......California [ apart from fund raising ], New York, Texas last time in the Presidential election ? I could name another thirty states.
The system is thoroughly undemocratic in every way.
You would have exactly the same problem if it was popular vote - they would only visit the largest cities.
.
Which are spread through far more varied states than the stale retreaded swing states.
Yes. It is always FL, PA, MI and OH. Obama brought in NC. I suppose WI will now join in. The TV networks there will make some money.
The rest of the US TV networks must be wondering why can't they have a share of the gravy.
Dr. Foxinl sox, and now you worship Zeus? or Thor?
Mr. G, are you accusing Janus of being a Conservative?
There is actually a movement in Greece to restore worship of Zeus et al. It's very hard right.
Do they really believe Zeus and co exist? Or do they want them restored to bring back the 'tradition'?
All Gods exist and are eternal. They just lose their power and diminish as people stop believing in them - and regaining their power as faith is reborn.*
As an aside, the Executive Order is bad economics.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
They have been a doing lot of the map stuff and add-on to Gmail like calendar for a while there.
Apparently Zurich is their biggest non-US development centre. (For a long while Copenhagen was Microsoft's biggest non-US.)
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
Sky said it was ~250k Brits.
If Sky said that water was wet I'd swirl it around to check.
As an aside, the Executive Order is bad economics.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
They have been a doing lot of the map stuff and add-on to Gmail like calendar for a while there.
Apparently Zurich is their biggest non-US development centre. (For a long while Copenhagen was Microsoft's biggest non-US.)
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
By "#1 Ally" I presume you really mean the more usual " lapdog " moniker.
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
I cannot see how this mess will be resolved with both sides so entrenched. Trump is now referring to Europe as a horrible mess.
This action by Trump is wrong and has left a nasty taste in the mouth. Tightening the borders is justified but not this way. He says it will be a 3 month freeze and no doubt some changes will be made but the one thing that gives some comfort is the US judicial system and the Republicans themselves can act jointly to hopefully mitigate the damage.
Whether we like it or not he is the President of the US and we do need to keep contact with him but Theresa May is well liked within the Republican movement and close links with them need to be maintained as the Republicans will be in charge for the next four years one way or another
As fas as his visit is concerned it is inconceivable in the present climate but to cancel it now is an understandable re-action but premature
We have no way of knowing what further chaos he will cause with his dislike of the EU and of more concern by his attitude to China and the South China seas.
It needs cool heads and thinking over the coming months as these worrying events pan out.
There has been a lot of fury on here and I considered that a period of non posting would be beneficial but I do not want to do that really.
To those who have accused me of being in favour of Trump I have never posted anything to give that impression and I state categorically that I do not think he should be President of the US but we are where we are
However, I do support Theresa May who has proved herself this last few weeks and in these dangerous times we need her reasoned consideration and competence more than ever
As an aside, the Executive Order is bad economics.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
Yep, I made this point this morning. It also applies to universities. As the western world's second biggest English speaking country an imaginative and welcoming immigration policy could pay major dividends. I expect, though, that it will be Canada that gets the benefit, just as with Hong Kong.
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
Sky said it was ~250k Brits.
If Sky said that water was wet I'd swirl it around to check.
Lol...need to be careful of all that fake news and alternative facts these days
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
These are just the numbers from wikipedia. For the other figures, I'm not sure, but it is clear that a higher proportion of Muslim countries (majority or plurality) do have anti-gay laws. I suspect a fair few of the 75 are remnants of British colonial laws.
Sunil asked this question first. Is homosexuality legal in Modi's India ? 1.2 bn people. More than many Muslim countries put together.
The correct answer is that in most under-developed countries it is illegal. Just see the Anglican Synod.
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
By "#1 Ally" I presume you really mean the more usual " lapdog " moniker.
There is some of that to be sure. The pay off is we get access to intelligence that basically no one else sees outside the US intelligence community, and we get to license some military technologies that no one else gets either. For example, although loads of countries have the Apache now, for a long time we were the only country except the USA to have it.
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
So if we just send the 1% back to where they came from we won't have a problem at all.
They can stay here, in fact as the number only applies to those wishing to travel to the U.S. it is even smaller
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
How can a regime that puts a white supremacist on the National Security Council and which consistently lies be trusted?
Everybody lies these days, haven't you noticed. Trump and his cronies lie constantly, the media lies to suite their cause du jour, the EU lies the whole damn time, its the world we live in, yet we still need to function and make alliances of convenience. We just need to remember Palmerston's maxim.
Is everyone lying?
Lying is saying something you know to be untrue.
Most people, most organisations, will choose to cherry pick and say what puts them in the best light. That's not lying.
Give me a couple of "EU lies the whole damn time" examples. And I don't mean "some MEP", I mean "the EU". Or "the media".
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
These are just the numbers from wikipedia. For the other figures, I'm not sure, but it is clear that a higher proportion of Muslim countries (majority or plurality) do have anti-gay laws. I suspect a fair few of the 75 are remnants of British colonial laws.
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
These are just the numbers from wikipedia. For the other figures, I'm not sure, but it is clear that a higher proportion of Muslim countries (majority or plurality) do have anti-gay laws. I suspect a fair few of the 75 are remnants of British colonial laws.
Sunil asked this question first. Is homosexuality legal in Modi's India ? 1.2 bn people. More than many Muslim countries put together.
The correct answer is that in most under-developed countries it is illegal. Just see the Anglican Synod.
Sex outside of marriage is also illegal in parts of the Middle East, it is basically a case of nations who still base their law in large part on taking religious teachings literally
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
Almost all the countries that ban gay sex are majority non-white, aren't they?
Isn't that because most countries aren't Muslim? Is homosexuality more likely to be illegal in Muslim countries is the question you should be asking.
I did a quick count of countries but of course population numbers are more significant
Some perspective is required! Homosexuality only became legal in England and Wales in 1967 (though lesbianism has always been legal), and in Scotland and NI more recently.
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
Sean Spicer now saying that the EO was inspired by an "imminent threat".
Thought experiment. How low would Trump have to stoop before the UK had to consider it's military / intelligence connections?
Very.
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
How can a regime that puts a white supremacist on the National Security Council and which consistently lies be trusted?
Everybody lies these days, haven't you noticed. Trump and his cronies lie constantly, the media lies to suite their cause du jour, the EU lies the whole damn time, its the world we live in, yet we still need to function and make alliances of convenience. We just need to remember Palmerston's maxim.
Is everyone lying?
Lying is saying something you know to be untrue.
Most people, most organisations, will choose to cherry pick and say what puts them in the best light. That's not lying.
Give me a couple of "EU lies the whole damn time" examples. And I don't mean "some MEP", I mean "the EU". Or "the media".
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
Almost all the countries that ban gay sex are majority non-white, aren't they?
As Fox states it was illegal here until a few decades ago, alongside abortion, contraception etc
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
These are just the numbers from wikipedia. For the other figures, I'm not sure, but it is clear that a higher proportion of Muslim countries (majority or plurality) do have anti-gay laws. I suspect a fair few of the 75 are remnants of British colonial laws.
Sunil asked this question first. Is homosexuality legal in Modi's India ? 1.2 bn people. More than many Muslim countries put together.
The correct answer is that in most under-developed countries it is illegal. Just see the Anglican Synod.
Is it true that almost all the nations wot ban gay sex are majority non-white?
Isn't that because most countries aren't Muslim? Is homosexuality more likely to be illegal in Muslim countries is the question you should be asking.
I did a quick count of countries but of course population numbers are more significant
Some perspective is required! Homosexuality only became legal in England and Wales in 1967 (though lesbianism has always been legal), and in Scotland and NI more recently.
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
Almost all the countries that ban gay sex are majority non-white, aren't they?
As Fox states it was illegal here until a few decades ago, alongside abortion, contraception etc
But not illegal now!
BTW Underdeveloped? They all seem to use smartphones and iPads these days!
Yes, done and dusted with the obvious point that no petitions as yet against state visits by Putin, the Chinese President or the King of Saudi Arabia
None of whom have banned UK citizens from entering their countries because of where they were born. I think we all get that we have to entertain the leaders of unpleasant regimes, but surely discriminating against British citizens who were not born in approved locations is not something we should be honouring.
I think funding terrorist organisations who launched attacks against British citizens, hacking the UK government and very dubious human rights records may be a little more significant than a travel restriction
The UK government's primary job is to protect British citizens not to reward those who discriminate against them.
Trump is not targeting British citizens as such, only if they happen to have been born in or lived in a blacklisted nation, 99% of Brits will be unaffected even if I disagree with what he is doing
Sky said it was ~250k Brits.
If Sky said that water was wet I'd swirl it around to check.
I cannot see how this mess will be resolved with both sides so entrenched. Trump is now referring to Europe as a horrible mess.
This action by Trump is wrong and has left a nasty taste in the mouth. Tightening the borders is justified but not this way. He says it will be a 3 month freeze and no doubt some changes will be made but the one thing that gives some comfort is the US judicial system and the Republicans themselves can act jointly to hopefully mitigate the damage.
Whether we like it or not he is the President of the US and we do need to keep contact with him but Theresa May is well liked within the Republican movement and close links with them need to be maintained as the Republicans will be in charge for the next four years one way or another
As fas as his visit is concerned it is inconceivable in the present climate but to cancel it now is an understandable re-action but premature
We have no way of knowing what further chaos he will cause with his dislike of the EU and of more concern by his attitude to China and the South China seas.
It needs cool heads and thinking over the coming months as these worrying events pan out.
There has been a lot of fury on here and I considered that a period of non posting would be beneficial but I do not want to do that really.
To those who have accused me of being in favour of Trump I have never posted anything to give that impression and I state categorically that I do not think he should be President of the US but we are where we are
However, I do support Theresa May who has proved herself this last few weeks and in these dangerous times we need her reasoned consideration and competence more than ever
Europe Elects @EuropeElects 5m5 minutes ago More France, PS+ (S&D, G/EFA) primary, second round, Radio Londres exit poll:
Hamon: 69% Valls: 31%
#PrimaireGauche #PrimairesCitoyennes
Oh yes, forgot about this. Good news for Macron, right?
Better for him than Valls though even with Hamon latest polls still have a Le Pen v Fillon run off but we await any fallout from the recent allegations around Fillon
Isn't that because most countries aren't Muslim? Is homosexuality more likely to be illegal in Muslim countries is the question you should be asking.
I did a quick count of countries but of course population numbers are more significant
Some perspective is required! Homosexuality only became legal in England and Wales in 1967 (though lesbianism has always been legal), and in Scotland and NI more recently.
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
Doesn't look right to me. Based on the map almost all (with the exception of parts of west and southern Africa) are majority Muslim.
Roger is correct.. 33 of the 75 countries listed (not counting ISIS as a country) are majority Muslim. And of majority Muslim countries, only half have such a law.
How many are plurality Muslim though? I expect a majority
Interestingly, that number is also 33.
You may be right but if you divide up between Muslim majority/plurality, Hindu majority/plurality, Christian majority/plurality, Other majority/plurality how do the figures stack up then?
Almost all the countries that ban gay sex are majority non-white, aren't they?
As Fox states it was illegal here until a few decades ago, alongside abortion, contraception etc
But not illegal now!
BTW Underdeveloped? They all seem to use smartphones and iPads these days!
Isn't that because most countries aren't Muslim? Is homosexuality more likely to be illegal in Muslim countries is the question you should be asking.
I did a quick count of countries but of course population numbers are more significant
Some perspective is required! Homosexuality only became legal in England and Wales in 1967 (though lesbianism has always been legal), and in Scotland and NI more recently.
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
Isn't that because most countries aren't Muslim? Is homosexuality more likely to be illegal in Muslim countries is the question you should be asking.
I did a quick count of countries but of course population numbers are more significant
Some perspective is required! Homosexuality only became legal in England and Wales in 1967 (though lesbianism has always been legal), and in Scotland and NI more recently.
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
The first article is prior to the referendum, and mentions that Juncker has advocated an EU army. And it then mentions the technical challenges. It doesn't contain an EU denial that there might ever be an army. (Which, by the way, there isn't yet. And may well not be. Because, you know, most of the challenges mentioned in the first article. Errr. Still exist.)
Also, things change. I can't promise that the UK won't criminalise homosexuality tomorrow. Even Theresa May can't promise that, because parliament could vote on it and over-rule her.
If she said the UK wouldn't criminalise homosexuality, and then parliament passed that, she wouldn't be lying, she'd be wrong.
@rcs1000 - I'm not sure you aren't getting carried away with your defence of the EU. It's an organisation that is riddled with corruption from top to bottom. Everyone cheats their hours, holidays, expenses, etc. Almost everyone is a yes-man. If their boss says lose the file then they will. However the people that work in the EU are mostly good, law-abiding, and well-intentioned. It'd all work out well if you sent a couple of the top bods off to Trump-land for a debrief.
As Theresa May took off from Washington on Friday the British prime minister had reason to believe she had emerged unscathed — and even enhanced — from her high-stakes visit to Donald Trump’s White House.
By Sunday, Mrs May was reminded of the many potential strains facing the latest version of the US-UK “special relationship”, as a chorus of politicians, including many from her own Conservative party, lashed out at Mr Trump’s ban on Muslim refugees while an online petition targeting Mr Trump gained hundreds of thousands of signatures.
Europe Elects @EuropeElects 5m5 minutes ago More France, PS+ (S&D, G/EFA) primary, second round, Radio Londres exit poll:
Hamon: 69% Valls: 31%
#PrimaireGauche #PrimairesCitoyennes
and, the winner is......................Macron !
Who do you think the last two in the race for President will be (I don't follow French politics)
Last two seems almost certain to include Le Pen. It now seems (just about) like Macron will be running against her. That's not a nice mix - an independent (of sorts) against a radical.
Europe Elects @EuropeElects 5m5 minutes ago More France, PS+ (S&D, G/EFA) primary, second round, Radio Londres exit poll:
Hamon: 69% Valls: 31%
#PrimaireGauche #PrimairesCitoyennes
and, the winner is......................Macron !
Who do you think the last two in the race for President will be (I don't follow French politics)
Last two seems almost certain to include Le Pen. It now seems (just about) like Macron will be running against her. That's not a nice mix - an independent (of sorts) against a radical.
@rcs1000 - I'm not sure you aren't getting carried away with your defence of the EU. It's an organisation that is riddled with corruption from top to bottom. Everyone cheats their hours, holidays, expenses, etc. Almost everyone is a yes-man. If their boss says lose the file then they will. However the people that work in the EU are mostly good, law-abiding, and well-intentioned. It'd all work out well if you sent a couple of the top bods off to Trump-land for a debrief.
I was probably getting carried away, yes
My point is that "oh, everyone lies" is simply not true
As Theresa May took off from Washington on Friday the British prime minister had reason to believe she had emerged unscathed — and even enhanced — from her high-stakes visit to Donald Trump’s White House.
By Sunday, Mrs May was reminded of the many potential strains facing the latest version of the US-UK “special relationship”, as a chorus of politicians, including many from her own Conservative party, lashed out at Mr Trump’s ban on Muslim refugees while an online petition targeting Mr Trump gained hundreds of thousands of signatures.
Comments
Being the #1 ally of the country that basically spends half the world's defense spending, and the vast majority of the world intelligence spend is not to be throw away because you don't like the cut of their current leaders jib, because we probably wont get it back under the next more desirable one.
May has an impossible task.
The sad logic of Brexit means she must ally herself (or at least bite her tongue) with the forces of hatred and reaction.
(Just as Corbyn's anti-imperialism sees him breaking bread with Hamas and the IRA).
Brexit really isn't worth the traducing of our values.
Donald Trump is demonstrating why he is a good real estate developer and a great candidate. Keep your opponents guessing, and off balance.
But the EO is bad economics. If you are Google, Intel, IBM, or any big technology company, that is used to bringing the world's best technologists to Silicon Valley, this will make you rethink where the best place to put a development centre is.
Because this wasn't: people from place [x] need to undergo extra screening before they can visit, which businesses can plan around.
It was: as of tomorrow, some of your employees on H1Bs or green cards who are out the country on business or holiday, can't come back.
I wonder if Google's announcement this weekend that all its Maps, Gmail, etc. development was being moved to Zurich was partly in response to this.
(This is, of course, a great opportunity for the UK, if we have the balls to take it.)
Were they scared that 1m would be reached by midnight ?
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928
The rest of the US TV networks must be wondering why can't they have a share of the gravy.
* Okay, a bit of TPratchett, Small Gods in there
Edit: Hit 10k at today, then 100k 1 hour 50 minutes later!
This action by Trump is wrong and has left a nasty taste in the mouth. Tightening the borders is justified but not this way. He says it will be a 3 month freeze and no doubt some changes will be made but the one thing that gives some comfort is the US judicial system and the Republicans themselves can act jointly to hopefully mitigate the damage.
Whether we like it or not he is the President of the US and we do need to keep contact with him but Theresa May is well liked within the Republican movement and close links with them need to be maintained as the Republicans will be in charge for the next four years one way or another
As fas as his visit is concerned it is inconceivable in the present climate but to cancel it now is an understandable re-action but premature
We have no way of knowing what further chaos he will cause with his dislike of the EU and of more concern by his attitude to China and the South China seas.
It needs cool heads and thinking over the coming months as these worrying events pan out.
There has been a lot of fury on here and I considered that a period of non posting would be beneficial but I do not want to do that really.
To those who have accused me of being in favour of Trump I have never posted anything to give that impression and I state categorically that I do not think he should be President of the US but we are where we are
However, I do support Theresa May who has proved herself this last few weeks and in these dangerous times we need her reasoned consideration and competence more than ever
But keep cheering him on if you like
The correct answer is that in most under-developed countries it is illegal. Just see the Anglican Synod.
Lying is saying something you know to be untrue.
Most people, most organisations, will choose to cherry pick and say what puts them in the best light. That's not lying.
Give me a couple of "EU lies the whole damn time" examples. And I don't mean "some MEP", I mean "the EU". Or "the media".
More
France, PS+ (S&D, G/EFA) primary, second round, Radio Londres exit poll:
Hamon: 69%
Valls: 31%
#PrimaireGauche #PrimairesCitoyennes
Many countries are a few decades behind us in social development, and in Muslim countries attitudes to homosexuality are decidedly ambivalent, for example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3384027/Women-children-boys-pleasure-secret-shame-Afghanistan-s-bacha-bazi-dancing-boys-dress-like-little-girls-make-skirts-abused-paedophiles.html
BTW Underdeveloped? They all seem to use smartphones and iPads these days!
And saying "he is joking" is not equivalent to "cheering him on."
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/682541/REVEALED-EU-to-rubber-stamp-its-HUGE-1trillion-budget-NEXT-week-after-referendum-delay
Springs immediately to mind.
That Daily Mail story is even worse than I'd realised; Bulgaria *is* an EU member!
The first article is prior to the referendum, and mentions that Juncker has advocated an EU army. And it then mentions the technical challenges. It doesn't contain an EU denial that there might ever be an army. (Which, by the way, there isn't yet. And may well not be. Because, you know, most of the challenges mentioned in the first article. Errr. Still exist.)
Also, things change. I can't promise that the UK won't criminalise homosexuality tomorrow. Even Theresa May can't promise that, because parliament could vote on it and over-rule her.
If she said the UK wouldn't criminalise homosexuality, and then parliament passed that, she wouldn't be lying, she'd be wrong.
Try again.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/dec/09/boris-johnson-trump-is-clearly-out-of-his-mind-video
By Sunday, Mrs May was reminded of the many potential strains facing the latest version of the US-UK “special relationship”, as a chorus of politicians, including many from her own Conservative party, lashed out at Mr Trump’s ban on Muslim refugees while an online petition targeting Mr Trump gained hundreds of thousands of signatures.
https://www.ft.com/content/73f34820-e643-11e6-893c-082c54a7f539
NEW THREAD
My point is that "oh, everyone lies" is simply not true