Imagine if Max Mosley were leader of the Tory party and he repeatedly praised the teachings and insights of his late father. There would be justified outrage and press criticism. Ed Miliband finds himself in a similar situation but his moral blindness is so great that he regards himself and his family as victims.
It's hypocrisy and EdM shouldn't get away with it.
Milliband is not responsible for anything his father might have said or done.
No, but he is responsible for what he says about his father.
If my father was a raving Marxist, I think I'd still stick up for him.
Plato, thanks for posting this. I hadn't heard of the EU proposition on this, but more immediately significant, I think, is the fact that the article you link to doesn't even mention FGM. If my understanding is correct, that males recover rapidly yet females are in pain for life, then I would have supposed that FGM would be the prior concern. Perhaps it is.
Try telling that to boys/men who ended up having their penis amputated or died as a result, for example David Reimer:
How comfortable would you feel with a babysitter from an ethnic minority (net comfortable): Con: +29 Lab: +30 LibD: +44 UKIP: -10
Presumably that's because you take care selecting the babysitter and it's personal characteristics vs. ethnicty that's important. It's a very different question to an abstract one about the PM or numbers (effectively it is a hyper-local version of the 'neighbourhood' question tim highlighted)
It's probably more distorted by the age issue too, more over 60's said don't know for obvious reasons, and the core Kipper demographic is the xenophobic pensioner railing against the 21st century.
There's still a 25 point swing between the 60+ group & UKIP.......
Although looking at the figures in detail, it appears that only 32% of UKIP supporters are uncomfortable with a babysitter from an ethnic minority.. 47% are either comfortable, or don't care either way.
Uncomfortable (fairly/very) with baby sitter from ethnic minority: Con: 16 Lab: 18 LibD: 12 UKIP: 32
For perspective 60+ is 20.
And the other side of the coin - fairly/very comfortable: Con: 45 Lab: 48 LibD: 56 UKIP: 22 60+: 35
As far as you know, did the last council ward you lived in have more/fewer/about the same number of ethnic minority people than where you live now?
"Don't know " Con: 19 Lab: 16 LibD: 23 UKIP: 1
If, as you imply, the only morally acceptable response is fairly/very comfortable to each question, then you're condemning most Conservative and Labour supporters, as well as UKIP supporters.
How comfortable would you feel with a babysitter from an ethnic minority (net comfortable): Con: +29 Lab: +30 LibD: +44 UKIP: -10
Presumably that's because you take care selecting the babysitter and it's personal characteristics vs. ethnicty that's important. It's a very different question to an abstract one about the PM or numbers (effectively it is a hyper-local version of the 'neighbourhood' question tim highlighted)
It's probably more distorted by the age issue too, more over 60's said don't know for obvious reasons, and the core Kipper demographic is the xenophobic pensioner railing against the 21st century.
There's still a 25 point swing between the 60+ group & UKIP.......
Although looking at the figures in detail, it appears that only 32% of UKIP supporters are uncomfortable with a babysitter from an ethnic minority.. 47% are either comfortable, or don't care either way.
Uncomfortable (fairly/very) with baby sitter from ethnic minority: Con: 16 Lab: 18 LibD: 12 UKIP: 32
For perspective 60+ is 20.
And the other side of the coin - fairly/very comfortable: Con: 45 Lab: 48 LibD: 56 UKIP: 22 60+: 35
As far as you know, did the last council ward you lived in have more/fewer/about the same number of ethnic minority people than where you live now?
"Don't know " Con: 19 Lab: 16 LibD: 23 UKIP: 1
If, as you imply, the only morally acceptable response is fairly/very comfortable to each question, then you're condemning most Conservative and Labour supporters, as well as UKIP supporters.
Not at all - what the evidence supports is that UKIP supporters are in general much more concerned about the ethnicity of their neighbours - other parties voters much less concerned - hence the much higher level of "don't knows".
How comfortable would you feel with a babysitter from an ethnic minority (net comfortable): Con: +29 Lab: +30 LibD: +44 UKIP: -10
Presumably that's because you take care selecting the babysitter and it's personal characteristics vs. ethnicty that's important. It's a very different question to an abstract one about the PM or numbers (effectively it is a hyper-local version of the 'neighbourhood' question tim highlighted)
It's probably more distorted by the age issue too, more over 60's said don't know for obvious reasons, and the core Kipper demographic is the xenophobic pensioner railing against the 21st century.
There's still a 25 point swing between the 60+ group & UKIP.......
Although looking at the figures in detail, it appears that only 32% of UKIP supporters are uncomfortable with a babysitter from an ethnic minority.. 47% are either comfortable, or don't care either way.
Uncomfortable (fairly/very) with baby sitter from ethnic minority: Con: 16 Lab: 18 LibD: 12 UKIP: 32
For perspective 60+ is 20.
And the other side of the coin - fairly/very comfortable: Con: 45 Lab: 48 LibD: 56 UKIP: 22 60+: 35
Well, that proves my point.
That other parties' voters are twice as likely to be comfortable with an ethnic minority babysitter than UKIP's (and half as likely to be uncomfortable)?
Plato, thanks for posting this. I hadn't heard of the EU proposition on this, but more immediately significant, I think, is the fact that the article you link to doesn't even mention FGM. If my understanding is correct, that males recover rapidly yet females are in pain for life, then I would have supposed that FGM would be the prior concern. Perhaps it is.
Try telling that to boys/men who ended up having their penis amputated or died as a result, for example David Reimer:
Thank you for the response, Andy. Are you saying that my understanding is not correct, or are you saying that exceptional cases of prolonged harm to males is of greater concern than routine prolonged harm to females, or something else?
Greig seems to know precisely what Rothermere wants right now. Did just the right things with the quick apology and took action with suspensions. Something that will only anger Dacre even more and escalate tensions between the two.
Rothermere want's scoops not a spotlight on himself, the Mail and his own family. So if Greig provides some strong exclusives, and Dacre keeps obsessing about this and refusing to let it go, then Rothermere will have very few qualms about what must eventually have to happen at some point anyway.
I'm sure Dacre would also love to choose his successor but that's not how it's going to work. It's Rothermere's call.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
If Ralph Miliband was "fighting Nazi's" then I guess Ben Ainslie was invading New Zealand.
By next week tim will have him awarded the VC for sinking the Bismark using a spanner.
Mr Peter Dacre was fighting no one except trying to get off with London show girls .
Can we please get away from this rather dangerous and nasty assumption that anyone not fighting on the front line was in some way cowardly.
I don't know what, if anything, Mr Dacre was doing for the war effort whilst at home. But the assumption that just because you were not on the front line, you were not helping, is fairly sick. Tell that to the land girls, the CO's who acted as bomb disposal officers, the Bevin Boys, and so on.
Every soldier, sailor and airman fighting probably had two or three men and women at home working to support him.
My grandfather had a horrendous time as a police constable, during the Blitz. Strangely, and unfairly to himself, he felt a lot of guilt at not having joined the army.
One of my grandfathers (as mentioned here passim) served on DEMS merchant ships for much of the war, which included being transferred with weapon between ships in mid-Atlantic by transfer chair once they were past German plane range.
He got transferred onto a land job doing calculations for the admiralty, because a captain thought his mind was wasted. He never forgave himself for accepting the transfer. He spent the rest of the war doing maths for the Navy.
I'd love to see some of the asshats on here call him a coward because he spent the last few years of the war 'not fighting Hitler', because someone decided his skills were best used elsewhere.
That's brilliant. What's impressive isn't so much the animation, but pulling together the information. I've considered doing similar for Britain's (and other country's) empires (based on something Sunil said on here) and the American Civil War.
I'm currently working in my spare time on a browser-based depiction of the development of London's railways, using SVG to depict the lines and the stations. The Central Line's pretty much done, as is the Northern and Metropolitan, all the way out past Aylesbury. There's a long way to go, and so much researching to be done ...
Comrade Josias! I look forward very much to seeing the finished product! I take it you have a copy of the 2012 edition of the London Railway Atlas by Joe Brown (Ian Allan) - I'm listed in the acknowledgements
If Ralph Miliband was "fighting Nazi's" then I guess Ben Ainslie was invading New Zealand.
By next week tim will have him awarded the VC for sinking the Bismark using a spanner.
Mr Peter Dacre was fighting no one except trying to get off with London show girls .
Can we please get away from this rather dangerous and nasty assumption that anyone not fighting on the front line was in some way cowardly.
I don't know what, if anything, Mr Dacre was doing for the war effort whilst at home. But the assumption that just because you were not on the front line, you were not helping, is fairly sick. Tell that to the land girls, the CO's who acted as bomb disposal officers, the Bevin Boys, and so on.
Every soldier, sailor and airman fighting probably had two or three men and women at home working to support him.
My grandfather had a horrendous time as a police constable, during the Blitz. Strangely, and unfairly to himself, he felt a lot of guilt at not having joined the army.
One of my grandfathers (as mentioned here passim) served on DEMS merchant ships for much of the war, which included being transferred with weapon between ships in mid-Atlantic by transfer chair once they were past German plane range.
He got transferred onto a land job doing calculations for the admiralty, because a captain thought his mind was wasted. He never forgave himself for accepting the transfer. He spent the rest of the war doing maths for the Navy.
I'd love to see some of the asshats on here call him a coward because he spent the last few years of the war 'not fighting Hitler', because someone decided his skills were best used elsewhere.
I've no doubt that all those who's time served at Bletchley Park and in the Intelligence Services was never mentioned in obituaries, would be labelled 'cowards' by some of the dimwits here.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
Comrade Antifrank! Can't imagine not having a foreskin - how would one cope with the glans rubbing against one's underpants all day?
Based on the yougov poll which is the topic of this thread it would seem that Heseltine's comments that UKIP were the heirs to Enoch Powell's legacy is not far from the mark!
That's brilliant. What's impressive isn't so much the animation, but pulling together the information. I've considered doing similar for Britain's (and other country's) empires (based on something Sunil said on here) and the American Civil War.
I'm currently working in my spare time on a browser-based depiction of the development of London's railways, using SVG to depict the lines and the stations. The Central Line's pretty much done, as is the Northern and Metropolitan, all the way out past Aylesbury. There's a long way to go, and so much researching to be done ...
Comrade Josias! I look forward very much to seeing the finished product! I take it you have a copy of the 2012 edition of the London Railway Atlas by Joe Brown (Ian Allan) - I'm listed in the acknowledgements
Pah! I'm partly working from a 1950's era British Railways Pre-grouping Atlas and Gazetteer by the aforementioned Ian Allan, cost 25 shillings. ;-)
If you'd like an early peek at what I've done, PM me. It's far from complete, either in terms of data or code, but it gives an idea of what I'm aiming for.
Nice that it is clarified in the piece that Blair is not being paid for this. His reputation is such people would assume anything he does is for cash thesedays, rightly or wrongly.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
That's brilliant. What's impressive isn't so much the animation, but pulling together the information. I've considered doing similar for Britain's (and other country's) empires (based on something Sunil said on here) and the American Civil War.
I'm currently working in my spare time on a browser-based depiction of the development of London's railways, using SVG to depict the lines and the stations. The Central Line's pretty much done, as is the Northern and Metropolitan, all the way out past Aylesbury. There's a long way to go, and so much researching to be done ...
Comrade Josias! I look forward very much to seeing the finished product! I take it you have a copy of the 2012 edition of the London Railway Atlas by Joe Brown (Ian Allan) - I'm listed in the acknowledgements
Pah! I'm partly working from a 1950's era British Railways Pre-grouping Atlas and Gazetteer by the aforementioned Ian Allan, cost 25 shillings. ;-)
If you'd like an early peek at what I've done, PM me. It's far from complete, either in terms of data or code, but it gives an idea of what I'm aiming for.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
I would have thought the procedure goes against God's creation because it His will that we are born with foreskins?
Gunfire at the Capitol building: BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 11m At least one police officer reported injured as shots fired near US Capitol http://bbc.in/1fM5OY9 Chaos at scene: pic.twitter.com/bI9hYhhKr9
Plato, thanks for posting this. I hadn't heard of the EU proposition on this, but more immediately significant, I think, is the fact that the article you link to doesn't even mention FGM. If my understanding is correct, that males recover rapidly yet females are in pain for life, then I would have supposed that FGM would be the prior concern. Perhaps it is.
Try telling that to boys/men who ended up having their penis amputated or died as a result, for example David Reimer:
Thank you for the response, Andy. Are you saying that my understanding is not correct, or are you saying that exceptional cases of prolonged harm to males is of greater concern than routine prolonged harm to females, or something else?
It's not true that FGM is always worse than male circumcision:
Nice that it is clarified in the piece that Blair is not being paid for this. His reputation is such people would assume anything he does is for cash thesedays, rightly or wrongly.
Not quite.
The article states that a 'spokesman for Mr Blair said: “Mr Blair and his team will provide advice at no cost to the Albanian government on how to modernise and implement a reform agenda'.
Doesn't say that he's not being paid or expensed by a third party.
'A team of Mr Blair’s staff will be stationed in Tirana, funded by international institutions.'
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
I don't think there's any doubt that male circumcision would have been banned in this country if it wasn't for a desire not to upset Jewish and Muslim people.
The problem of course with that is that you can't have a law which says it's okay for Jewish and Muslim people to do it but it's illegal for everyone else, so therefore it has to remain legal for everyone.
At 2.30pm a police officer was injured, the entire Capitol was put on lockdown and according to the Serjeant at Arms several injuries. A warning sounded on the Capitol, the House put into recess and the White House locked down, Obama being briefed. Many rushed from outside where shots were heard to the Supreme Court building
Who'd have thought that "what did you do in the war, daddy?" could still be an exciting question on pb in 2013?
I wonder if those taking a pop at Paul Dacre's father's war record are aware he was 20 when the war ended.....
It is tim making out that Miliband Snr. was a Norman stormin' war transform' land assaultin' warrior which has me chuckling into my soup.
The reality was old Ralph spent D-Day translating signals intercepted from Belgium.
Still it was no doubt braver than Peter Dacre who, in Mark Senior's account, spent his war years at the Windmill Theatre (WWII Motto: "We never clothed") plucking up courage to importune a chorus girl.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
How comfortable or uncomfortable do you feel about the number of people from ethnic minorities living here?
I would have thought the labour blocks would have looked like the lib dems,so I was surprised to see the high mark of people uncomfortable with labour people,then I thought of my labour area -
Well where I live,I suppose we have say very uncomfortable(Not from me or my family),I am one of the last white families living on my street,it's the same with other streets all round my area and it's down to white flight,so they must have being very uncomfortable.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I don't think there's any doubt that male circumcision would have been banned in this country if it wasn't for a desire not to upset Jewish and Muslim people.
The problem of course with that is that you can't have a law which says it's okay for Jewish and Muslim people to do it but it's illegal for everyone else, so therefore it has to remain legal for everyone.
You'd be pretty bloody stupid to ban a procedure which reduces HIV transmission by over half.
According to that logic, we should amputate the breasts of all women at the age of 18 to prevent them getting breast cancer.
Furthermore, the risk of HIV transmission is something which only affects a very small number of men. Why should all the rest of them have a procedure performed on them because of that minority? According to that logic, we should lock up all men between the ages of 18 and 30 to deter crime.
When will the Mail/Dacre apologists realise that the time has come to stop digging - it's getting funnier as the saga drags on .
If Dacre is the Chair of the PCC Ethics Committee can there be any doubt left that the press cannot be trusted to regulate themselves. You don't quite know whether to laugh or cry.
There is the issue of consent. Males in the UK are generally circumcised in infancy, the putative benefits in adulthood. If anyone wants to be circumcised to reduce HIV risk as an adult, it is difficult to object. Forcing it on a child for the same benefit decades later is very dubious. Childhood circumcision would not be allowed if it was not mandatory in some religions.
FGM is banned, but unprosecuted, despite many hospitals running special services to undo much of the damage done. Clitoridectomy clearly can not be reversed.
For consenting adults FGM is a different matter. It may surprise some on here that Cosmetic gynaecology is a booming area in private practice. There are increasing numbers done on the NHS also.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
When will the Mail/Dacre apologists realise that the time has come to stop digging - it's getting funnier as the saga drags on .
If Dacre is the Chair of the PCC Ethics Committee can there be any doubt left that the press cannot be trusted to regulate themselves. You don't quite know whether to laugh or cry.
I suggest laughter since there is far, far more to come.
"Re Sean Fear, a quick net search shows that half of the original ConHome columnists have joined UKIP. As journalist Neil Martin and Lord Tebbit observed: in 8 years, Cameron has shed half of his members and failed to win a majority."
"Take your pick, Mark, from Roger's local theatre:"
For me that's more significant than you can imagine .When I first moved to Soho and realized I was just around the corner from the Windmill Theatre I remembered as a 10 year old meeting Sheilla Van Damm at my school in North Wales. She was friends with the Headmaster. I was assigned to do a piece on her for the school journal together with another boy. He did the article and I did the photo
It was my first ever commission and I remember her explaining how the lights never went off and the girls wore no clothes for reasons I can't say made much sense at the time. Nonetheless I later became a photographer and he a writer* so we have a lot to thank her for.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
How does a man who was circumcised as an infant know whether or not their enjoyment of sex has been ruined? It's always seemed prtty good fun to me!
I don't think there's any doubt that male circumcision would have been banned in this country if it wasn't for a desire not to upset Jewish and Muslim people.
The problem of course with that is that you can't have a law which says it's okay for Jewish and Muslim people to do it but it's illegal for everyone else, so therefore it has to remain legal for everyone.
You'd be pretty bloody stupid to ban a procedure which reduces HIV transmission by over half.
According to that logic, we should amputate the breasts of all women at the age of 18 to prevent them getting breast cancer.
Furthermore, the risk of HIV transmission is something which only affects a very small number of men. Why should all the rest of them have a procedure performed on them because of that minority? According to that logic, we should lock up all men between the ages of 18 and 30 to deter crime.
I was responding to your medical argument regarding complications and death from the procedure which are likely to be dwarfed by a 60% reduction in HIV transmission If you want to use the child abuse argument instead I assume you want to ban ear pricing a of children and babies too.
Comrade tim!
Would you have unprotected sex with a circumcised man with HIV? Yes or no?
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
Tim that is a rubbish argument. I have no problem with people who are able to consent having their foreskin removed. And if you are old enough to have sex you are old enough to make this decision.
So any health benefits could be realised if said person so desired. But by then they would probably be old enough to work out it was a lot easier (and safer) just to use condoms.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
Comrade Sean F!
What's wrong with "self-abuse", as you put it?
It can cause blindness.
Rubbish, or else I wouldn't be able to type t h i s
That's brilliant. What's impressive isn't so much the animation, but pulling together the information. I've considered doing similar for Britain's (and other country's) empires (based on something Sunil said on here) and the American Civil War.
I'm currently working in my spare time on a browser-based depiction of the development of London's railways, using SVG to depict the lines and the stations. The Central Line's pretty much done, as is the Northern and Metropolitan, all the way out past Aylesbury. There's a long way to go, and so much researching to be done ...
Comrade Josias! I look forward very much to seeing the finished product! I take it you have a copy of the 2012 edition of the London Railway Atlas by Joe Brown (Ian Allan) - I'm listed in the acknowledgements
Pah! I'm partly working from a 1950's era British Railways Pre-grouping Atlas and Gazetteer by the aforementioned Ian Allan, cost 25 shillings. ;-)
If you'd like an early peek at what I've done, PM me. It's far from complete, either in terms of data or code, but it gives an idea of what I'm aiming for.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
How does a man who was circumcised as an infant know whether or not their enjoyment of sex has been ruined? It's always seemed prtty good fun to me!
'@CameronBrownUK BBC News - UK housebuilding activity expanding at a near 10-year high, survey shows bbc.in/1fIHbM9 #forhardworkingpeople'
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
You've just ruined wee Timmy's evening.
Clueless as ever zims
Faisal Islam @faisalislam We can also reveal 135,117: that in 12/13 the Government presided over the lowest financial year of UK housebuilding completions since 20s..
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 2h More houses completed in Britain in the late 1890s. Than in 2012/13.... France is building 2/3 times UK...
Thank gods for Planning Inspectors I guess, as I've seen dozens of cases of small and large developments that never would have seen the life of day following local objection, but are overturned as actually being well within local and national policies and with far less harmful impact than predicted, so the problem would be far worse than it is.
Seriously, if anyone wants to convince others that building anything pretty much anywhere should be allowed, have them attend plenty of planning meetings, and the intractability of objectors on the flimsiest grounds for anything, will eventually lead to a wish to dismiss any objection to any development in retaliation.
'@CameronBrownUK BBC News - UK housebuilding activity expanding at a near 10-year high, survey shows bbc.in/1fIHbM9 #forhardworkingpeople'
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
You've just ruined wee Timmy's evening.
Clueless as ever zims
Faisal Islam @faisalislam We can also reveal 135,117: that in 12/13 the Government presided over the lowest financial year of UK housebuilding completions since 20s..
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 2h More houses completed in Britain in the late 1890s. Than in 2012/13.... France is building 2/3 times UK...
Clueless as ever tim.
The private sector build for sale. If there is no demand they don't build.
The key statistic you need to measure is the ratio of dwellings built to dwellings sold. At present the UK private sector is building at a rate of around 35,000 dwellings per quarter which represents about 70% of the peak mid noughties build rate. Property sales are however running at less than 40% of peak. This means that construction companies are assuming that new builds will take a much higher than trend share (8.5%) of purchases or that short term demand will increase rapidly under stimulus from the HTB schemes and the increased velocity of the economic recovery.
The current ratio of builds to sales in the UK is higher than at any time in recent history. It is far above any ratio achieved by Labour between 1997 and 2010.
And now to France,. Faisal Islam picked up this stat from Allister Heath in City AM. It is out of date and miprepresents what is going on in France. Hollande announced a plan to build a million houses per year but the 2012 recession killed off demand and rates fell by 20% over the year and have remained in the doldrums this year. And the 20% fall was from actual build rates not the million promised.
Faisal and Allister need to learn quickly that the promises of socialist leaders on housebuilding numbers should not be taken at face value.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
The research, conducted by YouGov for Demos and Birkbeck College and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), is part of a study about responses to ethnic change in Britain.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
Comrade Sean F!
What's wrong with "self-abuse", as you put it?
It can cause blindness.
Rubbish, or else I wouldn't be able to type t h i s
There are always exceptions. I bet you've got hairy palms though.
Could the moderator make it clear why twitter pics are acceptable from other posters yet mine keep getting deleted?
If none are acceptable then applying the rules to everyone might be a slightly more effective way to proceed.
They aren't acceptable from any posters.
As the moderators haven't been on for a few hours, and we aren't on the site 24/7 we're reviewing all the comments and editing them accordingly when we get to them from when we last checked the site.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
The research, conducted by YouGov for Demos and Birkbeck College and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), is part of a study about responses to ethnic change in Britain.
Clueless and desperate as ever trying to cover up Labour's 13 year record with a single year of the Coalitions record.
The clue is in the words Labour,record,lowest
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
'Faisal Islam @faisalislam We can also reveal 135,117: that in 12/13 the Government presided over the lowest financial year of UK housebuilding completions since 20s..
It also rather begs the question of what an ethnic minority is. Michael Howard and Ed Miliband, as well as Disraeli were all ethnically Jewish, but either Christian or Athiest.
Michael Howard was clearly wanted by the Conservative party membership of the day.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
The research, conducted by YouGov for Demos and Birkbeck College and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), is part of a study about responses to ethnic change in Britain.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
It also rather begs the question of what an ethnic minority is. Michael Howard and Ed Miliband, as well as Disraeli were all ethnically Jewish, but either Christian or Athiest.
Michael Howard was clearly wanted by the Conservative party membership of the day.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
The research, conducted by YouGov for Demos and Birkbeck College and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), is part of a study about responses to ethnic change in Britain.
There is the issue of consent. Males in the UK are generally circumcised in infancy, the putative benefits in adulthood. If anyone wants to be circumcised to reduce HIV risk as an adult, it is difficult to object. Forcing it on a child for the same benefit decades later is very dubious. Childhood circumcision would not be allowed if it was not mandatory in some religions.
FGM is banned, but unprosecuted, despite many hospitals running special services to undo much of the damage done. Clitoridectomy clearly can not be reversed.
For consenting adults FGM is a different matter. It may surprise some on here that Cosmetic gynaecology is a booming area in private practice. There are increasing numbers done on the NHS also.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
I always require more stringent evidence when science judges on something that intrudes so significantly on religious belief.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
'@CameronBrownUK BBC News - UK housebuilding activity expanding at a near 10-year high, survey shows bbc.in/1fIHbM9 #forhardworkingpeople'
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
You've just ruined wee Timmy's evening.
Clueless as ever zims
Faisal Islam @faisalislam We can also reveal 135,117: that in 12/13 the Government presided over the lowest financial year of UK housebuilding completions since 20s..
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 2h More houses completed in Britain in the late 1890s. Than in 2012/13.... France is building 2/3 times UK...
Follow up on French housebuilding. Latest INSEE report to August 2013:
The number of units authorized by CVS smoothed data, down 10.2% over the past three months compared with the previous three months.
The housing starts down 1.9% over the last three months.
The equivalent figure to UK private sector builds in France is "individuels purs" of 118,169 over the past 12 months (to 08/13) down -9,6% on the prior year.
The difference between France and the UK lies in the number of "collectifs" (social housing) builds which are down (-10.7%) by more than private sector single family builds but, at 161,339 are substantially higher than in the UK. There is also a 44,346 annual build rate for "individuels groupés".
As always, tim, the problem in the UK is the business model for social housing builds. Over to you and rEd on that. I am a patient man.
I must say there is at least one line in this article on Gambia leaving the Commonwealth that strikes a realm chord:
The only thing the leaders of such nations enjoy more than castigating Britain for unwarranted colonial interference is complaining that Britain is neglecting its responsibilities to the former colonies it exploited for so long.
That can be extrapolated to any developed nation with a penchant for interferring in other nations, being constantly criticised for that interference at home as well as abroad, but simultaneously criticised for not being a world policeman or whatever in other situations.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
I gave you the courtesty of editing your posts, so the link to the pic was available.
Repeat offenders have their posts deleted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
Also one final warning for your Mr Pork
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
Any repeat of that will see your posting privileges suspended.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
Also one final warning for your Mr Pork
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
On PB? You have proof of this accusation of course?
Most of the arguments in favour of male circumcision are emotional rather than logical, in the same way that not wanting to have a babysitter from an ethnic minority is emotional rather than logical.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
Also one final warning for your Mr Pork
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
On PB? You have proof of this accusation of course?
Yes, those comments have been deleted.
We've noted a strong correlation when you don't like moderation policy, you post comments and or pics/videos about chickens and/or coward.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
Also one final warning for your Mr Pork
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
On PB? You have proof of this accusation of course?
Yes, those comments have been deleted.
We've noted a strong correlation when you don't like moderation policy, you post comments and or pics/videos about chickens and/or coward.
That's the entirety your proof? I am of course checking so I know which subjects I am no longer allowed to post on in case you notice a correlation.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
If the site rules are known only to yourself then it's slightly problematic to follow them. Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
No, in the past, it has been posted on this site, it is not acceptable to embed pictures or tweets on here.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
Also one final warning for your Mr Pork
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
On PB? You have proof of this accusation of course?
Yes, those comments have been deleted.
We've noted a strong correlation when you don't like moderation policy, you post comments and or pics/videos about chickens and/or coward.
That's the entirety your proof? I am of course checking so I know which subjects I am no longer allowed to post on in case you notice a correlation.
Here's one example.
In the early hours of the 25th of July, long after the moderating team had gone to bed, another poster urged the banning of other posters.
You then replied to that post with
This
"*snip*
Yet more absolute proof. Thanks for that.
You're certainly making someone look like a comical tw*t and for once it isn't just you. IS THAT CLEAR.
*tear of laughter etc.*"
You then posted a link to a video to a chicken video.
In the early hours of the 25th of July, long after the moderating team had gone to bed, another poster urged the banning of other posters.
You then replied to that post with
This
"*snip*
Yet more absolute proof. Thanks for that.
You're certainly making someone look like a comical tw*t and for once it isn't just you. IS THAT CLEAR.
*tear of laughter etc.*"
You then posted a link to a video to a chicken video.
There are other examples.
Slightly confusing that your proof now consists of posting an example of another poster breaking the rules, but nonetheless, to be clear are you stating that I must not post any chicken videos? I can of course follow your instructions to the letter and will do so in the future as I already stated very clearly below for the rule about twitter pics.
Ritual male circumcision is a slightly odd but essentially harmless practice. You don't hear many circumcised men complaining that their enjoyment of sex has been ruined. (Incidentally, circumcision is not mentioned once in the Koran, and there are differing views on whether Muslims must be circumcised or should be circumcised.)
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
It's not harmless if some men end up having their penis amputated or serious injury as a result.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
Some doctors consider male circumcision has medical benefits. And, it deters self-abuse.
Comrade Sean F!
What's wrong with "self-abuse", as you put it?
It can cause blindness.
Rubbish, or else I wouldn't be able to type t h i s
There are always exceptions. I bet you've got hairy palms though.
I'm pretty hairy all round actually, but strangely not my palms or soles of my feet!
I don't think there's any doubt that male circumcision would have been banned in this country if it wasn't for a desire not to upset Jewish and Muslim people.
The problem of course with that is that you can't have a law which says it's okay for Jewish and Muslim people to do it but it's illegal for everyone else, so therefore it has to remain legal for everyone.
err, you do realise people have circumcisions are also performed for medical reasons?
It also rather begs the question of what an ethnic minority is. Michael Howard and Ed Miliband, as well as Disraeli were all ethnically Jewish, but either Christian or Athiest.
Michael Howard was clearly wanted by the Conservative party membership of the day.
Finally we have some evidence that the Tory party and UKIP are racist. Not that anyone didn't know beforehand.
While it's clear UKIP supporters are outliers, Con, Lab and Lib Dem voters (health warning, small base size on latter) have pretty similar views, with gradation from LibDem>Lab>Con. For example:
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net) Con: +43 Lab: +49 LibD: +59 UKIP: +7
I've looked at the so called data (a few spread sheets) on these numbers and in no place does it say that Yougov carried out this so called poll. I think the OGH has fallen for a hoax and so have the UKIP nay sayers.
The research, conducted by YouGov for Demos and Birkbeck College and funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), is part of a study about responses to ethnic change in Britain.
Comments
Albania has signed up Tony Blair as an adviser and lobbyist in its uphill struggle to join the 28-nation European Union."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/10354017/Tony-Blair-signed-up-to-help-Albania-to-join-EU.html
As far as you know, did the last council ward you lived in have more/fewer/about the same number of ethnic minority people than where you live now?
"Don't know "
Con: 19
Lab: 16
LibD: 23
UKIP: 1
Con: 16
Lab: 18
LibD: 12
UKIP: 32
For perspective 60+ is 20.
And the other side of the coin - fairly/very comfortable:
Con: 45
Lab: 48
LibD: 56
UKIP: 22
60+: 35
Rothermere want's scoops not a spotlight on himself, the Mail and his own family. So if Greig provides some strong exclusives, and Dacre keeps obsessing about this and refusing to let it go, then Rothermere will have very few qualms about what must eventually have to happen at some point anyway.
I'm sure Dacre would also love to choose his successor but that's not how it's going to work.
It's Rothermere's call.
As AnneJGP says, the focus should be on female circumcision, which is far more harmful.
He got transferred onto a land job doing calculations for the admiralty, because a captain thought his mind was wasted. He never forgave himself for accepting the transfer. He spent the rest of the war doing maths for the Navy.
I'd love to see some of the asshats on here call him a coward because he spent the last few years of the war 'not fighting Hitler', because someone decided his skills were best used elsewhere.
•Hillary Clinton 61% (65%)
•Joe Biden 11% (13%)
•Elizabeth Warren 7%
•Andrew Cuomo 2% (4%)
•Mark Warner 1% (1%)
•Martin O’Malley 0% (1%)
•Don’t know 15% (14%)
Republican nomination
•Rand Paul 17% (15%)
•Chris Christie 13% (14%)
•Marco Rubio 12% (19%)
•Jeb Bush 11% (10%)
•Paul Ryan 10% (17%)
•Ted Cruz 10%
•Scott Walker 4% (2%)
•Bobby Jindal 3% (3%)
•Don’t know 19% (18%)
General Election
•Hillary Clinton (D) 49% (46%) [45%]
•Chris Christie (R) 36% (40%) [37%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 53% (50%) {49%}
•Rand Paul (R) 36% (38%) {41%}
•Hillary Clinton (D) 54%
•Ted Cruz (R) 31%
Paul Dacre is the Joseph Goebbels of British Print Media
If you'd like an early peek at what I've done, PM me. It's far from complete, either in terms of data or code, but it gives an idea of what I'm aiming for.
The fact that it might be a very small percentage is besides the point, because the procedure is usually not necessary.
Saying that a procedure has a very low complications rate is only a valid argument if it is medically necessary in the first place.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 11m
At least one police officer reported injured as shots fired near US Capitol http://bbc.in/1fM5OY9 Chaos at scene: pic.twitter.com/bI9hYhhKr9
www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaEoQVZnN8I
The article states that a 'spokesman for Mr Blair said: “Mr Blair and his team will provide advice at no cost to the Albanian government on how to modernise and implement a reform agenda'.
Doesn't say that he's not being paid or expensed by a third party.
'A team of Mr Blair’s staff will be stationed in Tirana, funded by international institutions.'
I wonder who these 'insititutions' might be?
The problem of course with that is that you can't have a law which says it's okay for Jewish and Muslim people to do it but it's illegal for everyone else, so therefore it has to remain legal for everyone.
The reality was old Ralph spent D-Day translating signals intercepted from Belgium.
Still it was no doubt braver than Peter Dacre who, in Mark Senior's account, spent his war years at the Windmill Theatre (WWII Motto: "We never clothed") plucking up courage to importune a chorus girl.
Take your pick, Mark, from Roger's local theatre:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w0ZD5vLZ64
I know which job I would have preferred.
'@CameronBrownUK
BBC News - UK housebuilding activity expanding at a near 10-year high, survey shows bbc.in/1fIHbM9 #forhardworkingpeople'
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
You've just ruined wee Timmy's evening.
I would have thought the labour blocks would have looked like the lib dems,so I was surprised to see the high mark of people uncomfortable with labour people,then I thought of my labour area -
Well where I live,I suppose we have say very uncomfortable(Not from me or my family),I am one of the last white families living on my street,it's the same with other streets all round my area and it's down to white flight,so they must have being very uncomfortable.
What's wrong with "self-abuse", as you put it?
How comfortable do you feel with the number of people from ethnic minorities in your neighbourhood (net)
Con: +43
Lab: +49
LibD: +59
UKIP: +7
Furthermore, the risk of HIV transmission is something which only affects a very small number of men. Why should all the rest of them have a procedure performed on them because of that minority? According to that logic, we should lock up all men between the ages of 18 and 30 to deter crime.
If Dacre is the Chair of the PCC Ethics Committee can there be any doubt left that the press cannot be trusted to regulate themselves. You don't quite know whether to laugh or cry.
FGM is banned, but unprosecuted, despite many hospitals running special services to undo much of the damage done. Clitoridectomy clearly can not be reversed.
For consenting adults FGM is a different matter. It may surprise some on here that Cosmetic gynaecology is a booming area in private practice. There are increasing numbers done on the NHS also.
http://www.thehospitalgroup.org/m/cosmetic-surgery/body-home/labiaplasty/#page
,
Dai Lama
@WelshDalaiLama
Absolutely shocked with the Daily Mail's front page this morning...
pic.twitter.com/00VFPw0Ejd
Any thoughts on this comment at UKPR:
"Re Sean Fear, a quick net search shows that half of the original ConHome columnists have joined UKIP. As journalist Neil Martin and Lord Tebbit observed: in 8 years, Cameron has shed half of his members and failed to win a majority."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/tv/bbc_news24/watchlive
"Take your pick, Mark, from Roger's local theatre:"
For me that's more significant than you can imagine .When I first moved to Soho and realized I was just around the corner from the Windmill Theatre I remembered as a 10 year old meeting Sheilla Van Damm at my school in North Wales. She was friends with the Headmaster. I was assigned to do a piece on her for the school journal together with another boy. He did the article and I did the photo
It was my first ever commission and I remember her explaining how the lights never went off and the girls wore no clothes for reasons I can't say made much sense at the time. Nonetheless I later became a photographer and he a writer* so we have a lot to thank her for.
*Not Dacre I hasten to add
It's always seemed prtty good fun to me!
Would you have unprotected sex with a circumcised man with HIV? Yes or no?
Ta!
So any health benefits could be realised if said person so desired. But by then they would probably be old enough to work out it was a lot easier (and safer) just to use condoms.
@WelshDalaiLama
Absolutely shocked with the Daily Mail's front page this morning... pic.twitter.com/00VFPw0Ejd
Perhaps so.
Seriously, if anyone wants to convince others that building anything pretty much anywhere should be allowed, have them attend plenty of planning meetings, and the intractability of objectors on the flimsiest grounds for anything, will eventually lead to a wish to dismiss any objection to any development in retaliation.
The private sector build for sale. If there is no demand they don't build.
The key statistic you need to measure is the ratio of dwellings built to dwellings sold. At present the UK private sector is building at a rate of around 35,000 dwellings per quarter which represents about 70% of the peak mid noughties build rate. Property sales are however running at less than 40% of peak. This means that construction companies are assuming that new builds will take a much higher than trend share (8.5%) of purchases or that short term demand will increase rapidly under stimulus from the HTB schemes and the increased velocity of the economic recovery.
The current ratio of builds to sales in the UK is higher than at any time in recent history. It is far above any ratio achieved by Labour between 1997 and 2010.
And now to France,. Faisal Islam picked up this stat from Allister Heath in City AM. It is out of date and miprepresents what is going on in France. Hollande announced a plan to build a million houses per year but the 2012 recession killed off demand and rates fell by 20% over the year and have remained in the doldrums this year. And the 20% fall was from actual build rates not the million promised.
Faisal and Allister need to learn quickly that the promises of socialist leaders on housebuilding numbers should not be taken at face value.
If none are acceptable then applying the rules to everyone might be a slightly more effective way to proceed.
Kenyan military appeals for witnesses after soldiers accused of looting Nairobi mall during terrorist attack
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/kenyan-soldiers-looted-stores-before-nairobi-mall-attack-was-over-report/article14674662/#dashboard/follows/
As the moderators haven't been on for a few hours, and we aren't on the site 24/7 we're reviewing all the comments and editing them accordingly when we get to them from when we last checked the site.
Just because someone else has violated the site rules does not give you the excuse to do so.
Clueless and desperate as ever trying to cover up Labour's 13 year record with a single year of the Coalitions record.
The clue is in the words Labour,record,lowest
'RT @faisalislam: Labour still holds the record for lowest housing starts though, it should be said, before we get too much crowing....
'Faisal Islam @faisalislam
We can also reveal 135,117: that in 12/13 the Government presided over the lowest financial year of UK housebuilding completions since 20s..
Michael Howard was clearly wanted by the Conservative party membership of the day.
Simply stating that they are unacceptable instead of repeatedly deleting the pics with no explanation until asked makes that rule somewhat difficult to surmise.
The twitter pics were clearly visible on the last thread so the assumption that they were acceptable is hardly unwarranted.
Repeatedly.
Then it was just unfortunate timing that resulted in my pics getting deleted without explanation while the others were not. You have made the rules very clear now.
I will not break them in the future.
The number of units authorized by CVS smoothed data, down 10.2% over the past three months compared with the previous three months.
The housing starts down 1.9% over the last three months.
The equivalent figure to UK private sector builds in France is "individuels purs" of 118,169 over the past 12 months (to 08/13) down -9,6% on the prior year.
The difference between France and the UK lies in the number of "collectifs" (social housing) builds which are down (-10.7%) by more than private sector single family builds but, at 161,339 are substantially higher than in the UK. There is also a 44,346 annual build rate for "individuels groupés".
As always, tim, the problem in the UK is the business model for social housing builds. Over to you and rEd on that. I am a patient man.
The only thing the leaders of such nations enjoy more than castigating Britain for unwarranted colonial interference is complaining that Britain is neglecting its responsibilities to the former colonies it exploited for so long.
That can be extrapolated to any developed nation with a penchant for interferring in other nations, being constantly criticised for that interference at home as well as abroad, but simultaneously criticised for not being a world policeman or whatever in other situations.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/robertcolvile/100239491/what-does-the-gambias-departure-mean-for-the-commonwealth/
In the past, whenever you don't like the moderation policy, you have implied the moderators are chickens or cowards.
Any repeat of that will see your posting privileges suspended.
We've noted a strong correlation when you don't like moderation policy, you post comments and or pics/videos about chickens and/or coward.
In the early hours of the 25th of July, long after the moderating team had gone to bed, another poster urged the banning of other posters.
You then replied to that post with
This
"*snip*
Yet more absolute proof. Thanks for that.
You're certainly making someone look like a comical tw*t and for once it isn't just you.
IS THAT CLEAR.
*tear of laughter etc.*"
You then posted a link to a video to a chicken video.
There are other examples.
Yes, I chose that example, that that poster had their posting privileges suspended in the morning when it was reviewed.
It was an example of when you don't like the moderating decisions, or think the moderators aren't sticking to rules.
My point is that moderators aren't on 24/7.
So you understand, that you must not imply or post that the moderators are chickens, cowards, poultry etc or pictures/videos along those lines.
This now ends this discussion.
I expect the LibDems will not be in the running, due to the lack of Ethnic MPs.
NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD