politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » 64 LAB peers pay for Guardian ad to tell Corbyn that he fails
Options
Comments
-
Absolutely. "Us and them" may involve the base instinct of xenophobia (I would say Brexit as based on this), but it isn't necessarily racist, though with some people it may be. Historical examples are more tribal than racist. Some have argued that racism and subsequently eugenics are largely post-Darwin concepts, and led to the movement known as Social DarwinismRichard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
0 -
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
We import 40% of the food we eat. Imports are far larger than exports by a long way. The only significant food that we export more than we import is Lamb.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
We lose the exports to EU27 because of the CET being applicable. If we put exactly the same tariffs up to the EU27 then according to your argument the EU will have no UK market to sell too. Therefore there is a significant lack of supply to the UK (with the exception of Lamb). But we must have the food so the food will come the prices will rise and the main beneficiary if those price rise will be UK farmers. Which is why the NFU does not want the Govt to reduce tariffs to zero, because they want their members to have these price rises.0 -
This supports the view that a lot of remainers voted tactically for Labour, to remove Mrs M’s majority, which hit the LibDems in particular.Tissue_Price said:0 -
Forestry! Good for water management, biodiversity and the best form of carbon capture.dixiedean said:
In the fells of Cumbria for example? Other than rewilding, which wouldn't be a bad option in my view, not immediately obvious what the demand would be.TOPPING said:
Plenty of options if you have the land.dixiedean said:
Forgive me if I am being a bit thick, but, if your flock is slaughtered, and you receive compensation, aren't you still out of a job? Because you then become a sheep less sheep farmer?eek said:
That's a minimum of £550m (9m at £60 a culled Ewe see http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/markets/auction-market-reports/daily-gb-regional-averages/ )AlastairMeeks said:No deal Leavers are now at the stage of demanding blood sacrifice:
https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1151419272666767362
https://twitter.com/JennyChapman/status/1151435517453619201
Hill grazing land is not really suited to farming other than sheep. I suspect may not go down well in Brecon.0 -
I think it's worse. What Trump said wasn't in the heat of the moment during a debate or something.kinabalu said:
On Trump, although this applies to many others too, it is clear that by 'vice signalling' (i.e that he has racist views) he seeks career advantage - in his case the career being US presidential politics, whereas, for example, with some of our homegrown varieties such as Tommy Robinson or Katie Hopkins it is ego and money.148grss said:I mean, most ancient states weren't racist in the sense we discuss today because their ideas of race were completely different. In ancient times distinction wasn't about skin colour, or even country of origin, as much as barbarian or civilised. Even pre Empire you had notions of Christendom and such that kind of transcended race as such, and the obsession with skin colour and other "biological" metrics of race were an invention of the Empire and scientific racism. Indeed, the first "inferior race" English scientists discussed were the Irish, who have only recently been welcomed into whiteness. They were known as white n-words for that reason.
My main contention is that saying "well if all these things are racist, racism doesn't mean anything" isn't true. It just means that when people hear the word racist they go "well that is bad, anything that is good can't be racist, and I think x is fine, so it isn't racist". It's like people accepting that Trump says racist things, but the idea he is personally racist is a bridge too far. Racism isn't something you are, it is evidenced by actions and outcomes.
It is often difficult, and sometimes impossible, with such people to ascertain how racist they actually are (in their hearts and minds) as opposed to it being a front that they have chosen because it profits them.
Questions then begged -
Is it worse or better if you are not as racist as you make out you are?
Or does it not matter because (as you say) it is purely about words and behaviour and outcomes?
My view (I think) is that it does not really matter but, if anything, a non-racist pretending to be racist for personal advantage is that little bit worse than the authentic racist. Because of the added dose of a most appalling brand of cynicism.0 -
False memory suggests Ukip support up 150%, while the Lib Dems are only up 30%.IanB2 said:
This supports the view that a lot of remainers voted tactically for Labour, to remove Mrs M’s majority, which hit the LibDems in particular.Tissue_Price said:0 -
Kind of. But one tribesman from Gaul could be a Roman, and the other a slave, depending on whether they bought into the Roman state, not because of their racial attributes, not because they were from Gaul rather than the Peninsula.Richard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
Interestingly the fall of Rome arguably was caused when some Roman elites refused to continue the practice of integration in attempt to make Rome great again, which heightened tensions with Gaulish and Germanic generals who would otherwise have been granted Roman citizenship, and instead ended up warring with the Roman state.
But also also, there is a reason why we talk about racism today. Because the European colonial powers and their racist policies are barely a lifetime out of memory, and very much affect people today. Things like that spectator article that did the rounds asking if Normans should give reparations to Anglo Saxons miss the point that the impacts of those issues are now gone to the wayside due to time and other factors. We accept the logic when it comes to reparations for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, but when the British Empire extracted the wealth of India to benefit those living in England (for example) the idea of reparations become unthinkable.0 -
Presumably after scanning the window sills of many a provincial boarding house, the Guardian has got hold of a copy of Boris's old novel:
Because the subconscious is so involved in the percolation of fiction, novelists often disclose more than they know or intend. Perhaps only Sigmund Freud could tell us why Johnson named a young woman after whom his alter ego Barlow lusts, “Cameron”, the Eton and Oxford contemporary who became his bitterest Tory rival.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jul/17/boris-johnson-seventy-two-virgins-novel0 -
Sorry, but forestry is not eco-friendly. In many areas it results in huge decline of biodiversity and soil damage as the most efficient forestry involves non-indigenous tree species. Try going into a Forestry Commission woodland and see how much diversity you can see. Low intensity hill farming results in very diverse habitatsFoxy said:
Forestry! Good for water management, biodiversity and the best form of carbon capture.dixiedean said:
In the fells of Cumbria for example? Other than rewilding, which wouldn't be a bad option in my view, not immediately obvious what the demand would be.TOPPING said:
Plenty of options if you have the land.dixiedean said:
Forgive me if I am being a bit thick, but, if your flock is slaughtered, and you receive compensation, aren't you still out of a job? Because you then become a sheep less sheep farmer?eek said:
That's a minimum of £550m (9m at £60 a culled Ewe see http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/markets/auction-market-reports/daily-gb-regional-averages/ )AlastairMeeks said:No deal Leavers are now at the stage of demanding blood sacrifice:
https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1151419272666767362
https://twitter.com/JennyChapman/status/1151435517453619201
Hill grazing land is not really suited to farming other than sheep. I suspect may not go down well in Brecon.0 -
I think that's dancing on pinheads, frankly. If you were about to slaughtered by the Mongol hordes, it probably wouldn't have been much consolation that The Origin of Species hadn't been published. Or if you want a clearer example, look at the racial 'superiority' (according to themselves) of historic China or Japan.Nigel_Foremain said:
Absolutely. "Us and them" may involve the base instinct of xenophobia (I would say Brexit as based on this), but it isn't necessarily racist, though with some people it may be. Historical examples are more tribal than racist. Some have argued that racism and subsequently eugenics are largely post-Darwin concepts, and led to the movement known as Social DarwinismRichard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
0 -
Given that our No Deal plan seems to be let things in and ignore paper work why would the EU provide us with a deal to allow us to export goods when we are allowing imports to occur regardless.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.
Yes the No Deal people are that thick and really don't understand Game theory let alone negotiation tactics.0 -
Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.kinabalu said:
On Trump, although this applies to many others too, it is clear that by 'vice signalling' (i.e that he has racist views) he seeks career advantage - in his case the career being US presidential politics, whereas, for example, with some of our homegrown varieties such as Tommy Robinson or Katie Hopkins it is ego and money.148grss said:I mean, most ancient states weren't racist in the sense we discuss today because their ideas of race were completely different. In ancient times distinction wasn't about skin colour, or even country of origin, as much as barbarian or civilised. Even pre Empire you had notions of Christendom and such that kind of transcended race as such, and the obsession with skin colour and other "biological" metrics of race were an invention of the Empire and scientific racism. Indeed, the first "inferior race" English scientists discussed were the Irish, who have only recently been welcomed into whiteness. They were known as white n-words for that reason.
My main contention is that saying "well if all these things are racist, racism doesn't mean anything" isn't true. It just means that when people hear the word racist they go "well that is bad, anything that is good can't be racist, and I think x is fine, so it isn't racist". It's like people accepting that Trump says racist things, but the idea he is personally racist is a bridge too far. Racism isn't something you are, it is evidenced by actions and outcomes.
It is often difficult, and sometimes impossible, with such people to ascertain how racist they actually are (in their hearts and minds) as opposed to it being a front that they have chosen because it profits them.
Questions then begged -
Is it worse or better if you are not as racist as you make out you are?
Or does it not matter because (as you say) it is purely about words and behaviour and outcomes?
My view (I think) is that it does not really matter but, if anything, a non-racist pretending to be racist for personal advantage is that little bit worse than the authentic racist. Because of the added dose of a most appalling brand of cynicism.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.0 -
Just to mention, at least to non-veggies, that British lamb is a fabulously good product (Cumbrian best of all), that it is produced on a lot of otherwise fairly marginal land, and that sheep are famously resistant to intensive rearing of the sort that afflicts some other meat production. Theirs is not a bad life all told. If we ended up consuming more of this wonderful home produced product it would be a good thing. Let's hope for at least a mini deal over lamb, which other countries appreciate more than we do ourselves.Foxy said:
Forestry! Good for water management, biodiversity and the best form of carbon capture.dixiedean said:
In the fells of Cumbria for example? Other than rewilding, which wouldn't be a bad option in my view, not immediately obvious what the demand would be.TOPPING said:
Plenty of options if you have the land.dixiedean said:
Forgive me if I am being a bit thick, but, if your flock is slaughtered, and you receive compensation, aren't you still out of a job? Because you then become a sheep less sheep farmer?eek said:
That's a minimum of £550m (9m at £60 a culled Ewe see http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/markets/auction-market-reports/daily-gb-regional-averages/ )AlastairMeeks said:No deal Leavers are now at the stage of demanding blood sacrifice:
https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1151419272666767362
https://twitter.com/JennyChapman/status/1151435517453619201
Hill grazing land is not really suited to farming other than sheep. I suspect may not go down well in Brecon.
0 -
Our no deal plan is not to ignore regulations. The press is full of food shortage warnings, which can only occur if we do not ignore current regulations.eek said:
Given that our No Deal plan seems to be let things in and ignore paper work why would the EU provide us with a deal to allow us to export goods when we are allowing imports to occur regardless.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.
Yes the No Deal people are that thick and really don't understand Game theory let alone negotiation tactics.0 -
-
Good afternoon, everyone.
Mr. Kirk, lamb's quite a nice meat. Some think it's a bit fatty, but as a thinner chap that's a plus for me.0 -
Hmm, with you until the last sentence, but really that is revisionism. The idea that India was some kind of non-racist social democratic paradise, prosperous and with the prosperity fairly distributed and minorities protected, until the hated British came and stole the wealth, is completely out with the fairies.148grss said:
Kind of. But one tribesman from Gaul could be a Roman, and the other a slave, depending on whether they bought into the Roman state, not because of their racial attributes, not because they were from Gaul rather than the Peninsula.Richard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
Interestingly the fall of Rome arguably was caused when some Roman elites refused to continue the practice of integration in attempt to make Rome great again, which heightened tensions with Gaulish and Germanic generals who would otherwise have been granted Roman citizenship, and instead ended up warring with the Roman state.
But also also, there is a reason why we talk about racism today. Because the European colonial powers and their racist policies are barely a lifetime out of memory, and very much affect people today. Things like that spectator article that did the rounds asking if Normans should give reparations to Anglo Saxons miss the point that the impacts of those issues are now gone to the wayside due to time and other factors. We accept the logic when it comes to reparations for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, but when the British Empire extracted the wealth of India to benefit those living in England (for example) the idea of reparations become unthinkable.1 -
Excellent! Perhaps you can tell us *when* this mini deal will be done, and with whom. Because Boris, pbuh, is about to send Parliament on its holidays, have a General Election, and there is a limit on what the civil service can do by itself legally. We're kind of running out of time.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
We import 40% of the food we eat. Imports are far larger than exports by a long way. The only significant food that we export more than we import is Lamb.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
We lose the exports to EU27 because of the CET being applicable. If we put exactly the same tariffs up to the EU27 then according to your argument the EU will have no UK market to sell too. Therefore there is a significant lack of supply to the UK (with the exception of Lamb). But we must have the food so the food will come the prices will rise and the main beneficiary if those price rise will be UK farmers. Which is why the NFU does not want the Govt to reduce tariffs to zero, because they want their members to have these price rises.0 -
Yes, I am partial to lamb, and of meats it is least industrialised, apart from slaughter. Rather high in saturated fat but in modest quantities a good thing.algarkirk said:
Just to mention, at least to non-veggies, that British lamb is a fabulously good product (Cumbrian best of all), that it is produced on a lot of otherwise fairly marginal land, and that sheep are famously resistant to intensive rearing of the sort that afflicts some other meat production. Theirs is not a bad life all told. If we ended up consuming more of this wonderful home produced product it would be a good thing. Let's hope for at least a mini deal over lamb, which other countries appreciate more than we do ourselves.Foxy said:
Forestry! Good for water management, biodiversity and the best form of carbon capture.dixiedean said:
In the fells of Cumbria for example? Other than rewilding, which wouldn't be a bad option in my view, not immediately obvious what the demand would be.TOPPING said:
Plenty of options if you have the land.dixiedean said:
Forgive me if I am being a bit thick, but, if your flock is slaughtered, and you receive compensation, aren't you still out of a job? Because you then become a sheep less sheep farmer?eek said:
That's a minimum of £550m (9m at £60 a culled Ewe see http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/markets/auction-market-reports/daily-gb-regional-averages/ )AlastairMeeks said:No deal Leavers are now at the stage of demanding blood sacrifice:
https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1151419272666767362
https://twitter.com/JennyChapman/status/1151435517453619201
Hill grazing land is not really suited to farming other than sheep. I suspect may not go down well in Brecon.0 -
What was the deleted tweet?Scott_P said:0 -
Hinting that they hate Jews so as to hoover up the Muslim vote?TOPPING said:Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.
No, not for me. I do not believe that for a second.0 -
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8547/CBP-8547.pdfviewcode said:
Excellent! Perhaps you can tell us *when* this mini deal will be done, and with whom. Because Boris, pbuh, is about to send Parliament on its holidays, have a General Election, and there is a limit on what the civil service can do by itself legally. We're kind of running out of time.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
come the prices will rise and the main beneficiary if those price rise will be UK farmers. Which is why the NFU does not want the Govt to reduce tariffs to zero, because they want their members to have these price rises.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
They have been done - The EU has agreed to recognise UK food safety standards as have we agreed the same to the EU.
0 -
Well, that was easy.ralphmalph said:
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8547/CBP-8547.pdfviewcode said:
Excellent! Perhaps you can tell us *when* this mini deal will be done, and with whom. Because Boris, pbuh, is about to send Parliament on its holidays, have a General Election, and there is a limit on what the civil service can do by itself legally. We're kind of running out of time.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
come the prices will rise and the main beneficiary if those price rise will be UK farmers. Which is why the NFU does not want the Govt to reduce tariffs to zero, because they want their members to have these price rises.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
They have been done - The EU has agreed to recognise UK food safety standards as have we agreed the same to the EU.
0 -
But there will still be sanitary checks - and I suspect as with Roger and Nice airport they will be very slowly checked...ralphmalph said:
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8547/CBP-8547.pdfviewcode said:
Excellent! Perhaps you can tell us *when* this mini deal will be done, and with whom. Because Boris, pbuh, is about to send Parliament on its holidays, have a General Election, and there is a limit on what the civil service can do by itself legally. We're kind of running out of time.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
come the prices will rise and the main beneficiary if those price rise will be UK farmers. Which is why the NFU does not want the Govt to reduce tariffs to zero, because they want their members to have these price rises.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
They have been done - The EU has agreed to recognise UK food safety standards as have we agreed the same to the EU.0 -
That's cool you're not forced to believe it. I don't think there is a particular "Muslim vote". I do think that broadly the Jews are such a tiny constituency, while the anti-semitic tropes play to people's disaffection and powerlessness such that if Lab can show it is batting for the little guy against "The [Jewish] Man" who, as we know from thatkinabalu said:
Hinting that they hate Jews so as to hoover up the Muslim vote?TOPPING said:Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.
No, not for me. I do not believe that for a second.historical documentmural, control all the money and have their feet on the necks of the lumpenproletariat, then for Labour that's a good thing.0 -
I agree on pine plantations, but I have in mind reafforestation with ancient British woodland species. The purpose of carbon capture is to keep the biomass alive as long as possible.Nigel_Foremain said:
Sorry, but forestry is not eco-friendly. In many areas it results in huge decline of biodiversity and soil damage as the most efficient forestry involves non-indigenous tree species. Try going into a Forestry Commission woodland and see how much diversity you can see. Low intensity hill farming results in very diverse habitatsFoxy said:
Forestry! Good for water management, biodiversity and the best form of carbon capture.dixiedean said:
In the fells of Cumbria for example? Other than rewilding, which wouldn't be a bad option in my view, not immediately obvious what the demand would be.TOPPING said:
Plenty of options if you have the land.dixiedean said:
Forgive me if I am being a bit thick, but, if your flock is slaughtered, and you receive compensation, aren't you still out of a job? Because you then become a sheep less sheep farmer?eek said:
That's a minimum of £550m (9m at £60 a culled Ewe see http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/markets/auction-market-reports/daily-gb-regional-averages/ )AlastairMeeks said:No deal Leavers are now at the stage of demanding blood sacrifice:
https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1151419272666767362
https://twitter.com/JennyChapman/status/1151435517453619201
Hill grazing land is not really suited to farming other than sheep. I suspect may not go down well in Brecon.0 -
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1151484447738519552RobD said:What was the deleted tweet?
0 -
Mr. P, not quite as good as the line he was present but not involved.
Mr. Eagles, supposing Boris wins, (and I realise this is a very difficult question to answer), what do you see happening next?0 -
If this is true then Richard Leonard’s team really are at risk of going sub-10%.IanB2 said:
This supports the view that a lot of remainers voted tactically for Labour, to remove Mrs M’s majority, which hit the LibDems in particular.Tissue_Price said:
This has been the most significant change in voting behaviour during my lifetime: the decline of the SLab vote from c50% to c10%. Amazing.
Tories beware: the number of Tory supporters who prefer Remain (c35% of Con VI) could desert you just as pro-independence SLab supporters (was c40% of SLab VI) deserted them.
0 -
Lumpenproletariat - now that's a great phrase. Being a bit lumpen myself I don't think you've used it particularly correct ; but still.TOPPING said:
That's cool you're not forced to believe it. I don't think there is a particular "Muslim vote". I do think that broadly the Jews are such a tiny constituency, while the anti-semitic tropes play to people's disaffection and powerlessness such that if Lab can show it is batting for the little guy against "The [Jewish] Man" who, as we know from thatkinabalu said:
Hinting that they hate Jews so as to hoover up the Muslim vote?TOPPING said:Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.
No, not for me. I do not believe that for a second.historical documentmural, control all the money and have their feet on the necks of the lumpenproletariat, then for Labour that's a good thing.0 -
Ask Owen Paterson.nico67 said:How many Tory MPs represent highly agricultural seats ?
Surely they must be getting a little worried .
Oh.0 -
He’s going to get VONC’d the question is when andMorris_Dancer said:Mr. P, not quite as good as the line he was present but not involved.
Mr. Eagles, supposing Boris wins, (and I realise this is a very difficult question to answer), what do you see happening next?
i) Do we get a GONU that extends A50 and then calls an election
or
ii) We go straight to a general election0 -
Lidlproletariat? The masses uninterested in class struggle. Seems to be quite apt to me.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Lumpenproletariat - now that's a great phrase. Being a bit lumpen myself I don't think you've used it particularly correct ; but still.TOPPING said:
That's cool you're not forced to believe it. I don't think there is a particular "Muslim vote". I do think that broadly the Jews are such a tiny constituency, while the anti-semitic tropes play to people's disaffection and powerlessness such that if Lab can show it is batting for the little guy against "The [Jewish] Man" who, as we know from thatkinabalu said:
Hinting that they hate Jews so as to hoover up the Muslim vote?TOPPING said:Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.
No, not for me. I do not believe that for a second.historical documentmural, control all the money and have their feet on the necks of the lumpenproletariat, then for Labour that's a good thing.0 -
Could you try that last sentence again it actually reads " The press is full of food shortage warnings, which can only occur if we do not ignore follow current regulations.ralphmalph said:
Our no deal plan is not to ignore regulations. The press is full of food shortage warnings, which can only occur if we do not ignore current regulations.eek said:
Given that our No Deal plan seems to be let things in and ignore paper work why would the EU provide us with a deal to allow us to export goods when we are allowing imports to occur regardless.ralphmalph said:
in the case of no deal brexit it will not even be put on a ferry either here or on the UK. The agreement that allows the food to be traded is in the EU agreements. So if we leave with no deal we can not sell certain foods to them and they can not sell certain foods to use. Which is why in the case of no deal a mini deal on food would be done.
Yes the No Deal people are that thick and really don't understand Game theory let alone negotiation tactics.0 -
White people come out *slightly* better on average in the UK than people who aren't white, but the difference is slight. And one's social class is a far better determinant of outcomes than race. It's far preferable to be born to a black middle class family than a white working class family.148grss said:
If your definition of "practically a racist state" is simply a literal apartheid state, sure, hardly anywhere is racist. If your definition is instead one that takes the view that the policies of policing, the judiciary, education, healthcare and welfare mean that white people come out much better than non white people (on average, controlling for class), yes most of the old colonial powers and the US are very much racist.Sean_F said:
When everywhere is racist, nowhere is. This is pretty small beer.148grss said:
I would say that pretty much all of the post imperial powers and their colonies are practically racist states. Laws in this country are not universally applied; illegal drug usage is about even split across racial lines, for instance, yet arrests are higher amongst non white people. Non white people are disproportionately likely to be affected by austerity and cuts to public services. Courts are more likely to hand down harsher sentences for the same crime. And when the media talks about the working class, there is always an assumed "white" before hand, making the working class seem a monolith whereas the working class in this country has a large number of non white people. We could talk about further structural inequalities in education, healthcare and elsewhere...Sean_F said:
I wouldn't say the UK is a practically racist state, unless one is arguing that every political entity is practically racist.148grss said:As for racism, I don't think either state is constitutionally racist, although both are practically racist, in that the British state's policies and the method of enacting said policies seem to disproportionately target and discriminate against ethnic minorities.
0 -
Works for me. Labour voters would of course just prefer the term "proletariat" for themselves if they know what it means.TOPPING said:
Lidlproletariat? The masses uninterested in class struggle. Seems to be quite apt to me.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Lumpenproletariat - now that's a great phrase. Being a bit lumpen myself I don't think you've used it particularly correct ; but still.TOPPING said:
That's cool you're not forced to believe it. I don't think there is a particular "Muslim vote". I do think that broadly the Jews are such a tiny constituency, while the anti-semitic tropes play to people's disaffection and powerlessness such that if Lab can show it is batting for the little guy against "The [Jewish] Man" who, as we know from thatkinabalu said:
Hinting that they hate Jews so as to hoover up the Muslim vote?TOPPING said:Same with the Labour Party. Their institutional anti-semitism and shoot the messenger strategy must at some point cut through.
And I think they are quite happy that it does because in their calculus they will get more votes being perceived to be anti-semitic than they will if they explicitly reject or address it.
No, not for me. I do not believe that for a second.historical documentmural, control all the money and have their feet on the necks of the lumpenproletariat, then for Labour that's a good thing.0 -
Will said GONU actually be able to extend or will they have to revoke? Remember on November 1st the new EU administration replaces the current one...TheScreamingEagles said:
He’s going to get VONC’d the question is when andMorris_Dancer said:Mr. P, not quite as good as the line he was present but not involved.
Mr. Eagles, supposing Boris wins, (and I realise this is a very difficult question to answer), what do you see happening next?
i) Do we get a GONU that extends A50 and then calls an election
or
ii) We go straight to a general election
0 -
Oh dear. He’s a hardcore Good Friday Agreement denier.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Mr. Eagles, if we go straight to election time, surely that's a wonderful scenario for the Lib Dems?
They're actually pro-EU, not floppy pro-EU like Labour. They'll benefit from tactical voting (whereas the Conservatives will be hit mostly by BP splits). They'll have a leader who isn't utterly incompetent, unlike the two main parties.
....
Tempted to put a little on them getting most votes/seats.0 -
1. October. Con MPs won't rebel on a question of that scale until there's no alternative.TheScreamingEagles said:
He’s going to get VONC’d the question is when andMorris_Dancer said:Mr. P, not quite as good as the line he was present but not involved.
Mr. Eagles, supposing Boris wins, (and I realise this is a very difficult question to answer), what do you see happening next?
i) Do we get a GONU that extends A50 and then calls an election
or
ii) We go straight to a general election
2(i). No, but there might be a Corbyn govt which does so.
2(ii). Possibly, which would be one hell of a mess.0 -
The caste system is a very enduring system of institutionalised racism.Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmm, with you until the last sentence, but really that is revisionism. The idea that India was some kind of non-racist social democratic paradise, prosperous and with the prosperity fairly distributed and minorities protected, until the hated British came and stole the wealth, is completely out with the fairies.148grss said:
Kind of. But one tribesman from Gaul could be a Roman, and the other a slave, depending on whether they bought into the Roman state, not because of their racial attributes, not because they were from Gaul rather than the Peninsula.Richard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
Interestingly the fall of Rome arguably was caused when some Roman elites refused to continue the practice of integration in attempt to make Rome great again, which heightened tensions with Gaulish and Germanic generals who would otherwise have been granted Roman citizenship, and instead ended up warring with the Roman state.
But also also, there is a reason why we talk about racism today. Because the European colonial powers and their racist policies are barely a lifetime out of memory, and very much affect people today. Things like that spectator article that did the rounds asking if Normans should give reparations to Anglo Saxons miss the point that the impacts of those issues are now gone to the wayside due to time and other factors. We accept the logic when it comes to reparations for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, but when the British Empire extracted the wealth of India to benefit those living in England (for example) the idea of reparations become unthinkable.
Racism is as old as history. Caesar exterminated entire German and Gallic tribes.0 -
Yes but the EU has varying levels of percentages that have to be checked. For example if the EU trusts the third party countries standards then 25% of the imports from that country of fresh chicken needs to be checked at a BIP. If the EU does not trust then 100% is checked i.e Thailand Chicken. They vary by different animals as well.eek said:
But there will still be sanitary checks - and I suspect as with Roger and Nice airport they will be very slowly checked...ralphmalph said:
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8547/CBP-8547.pdfviewcode said:
Excellent! Perhaps you can tell us *when* this mini deal will be done, and with whom. Because Boris, pbuh, is about to send Parliament on its holidays, have a General Election, and there is a limit on what the civil service can do by itself legally. We're kind of running out of time.ralphmalph said:
would be done.eek said:
Did I mention tariffs? It's red tape that will kill us - sorry that meat can't leave the ferry it's not certified....ralphmalph said:
ecause they want their members to have these price rises.eek said:
Note - my post isn't about subsidies remaining - it's about the sudden destruction of the export market resulting in an additional significant loss of sales...ralphmalph said:
or food safety.eek said:
Hunt thinks it will cost £6bn see https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/jeremy-hunt-announces-no-deal-funding-for-british/ and https://www.nfuonline.com/news/latest-news/a-no-deal-brexit-must-be-avoided-at-all-costs-uk-farming-roundtable-warns/ which basically confirms that we won't be able to export anything thanks to red tape...TheScreamingEagles said:Why the feck would we compensate farmers?
Those 🛎 ends voted for Brexit.
Brexit means Brexit and they should reap what they sow.
We should spend that money on the NHS.
As for why - these things are only an issue due to a No Deal exit, if we leave with a Deal we can still export food to the EU - without a deal we can't...
And remember Boris promised during the referendum that we wouldn't leaving without a deal - BMW, Mercedes and VW would make sure of that..
1 and 2 are given - this has nothing to do with either of them - a No Deal Brexit means most farmers have no market to sell their product to...
They have been done - The EU has agreed to recognise UK food safety standards as have we agreed the same to the EU.0 -
I don't think I claimed it was. India had it's own class and caste system, with religious and racial animus I am sure. But the fact we took the wealth and installed our own political class meant that they had to deal with those issues on top of Imperialism. Had the British not turned up maybe they would have dealt with that in their own time, in their own way, and made a better job of it than post Imperial India. The point is the Empire didn't give them that freedom, it was taken by the point of a gun. As someone who has personally benefited from that, I think it is only fair to point it out and try to redress the issue.Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmm, with you until the last sentence, but really that is revisionism. The idea that India was some kind of non-racist social democratic paradise, prosperous and with the prosperity fairly distributed and minorities protected, until the hated British came and stole the wealth, is completely out with the fairies.148grss said:
Kind of. But one tribesman from Gaul could be a Roman, and the other a slave, depending on whether they bought into the Roman state, not because of their racial attributes, not because they were from Gaul rather than the Peninsula.Richard_Nabavi said:
Isn't it just a difference of the size of the groups which are defined as 'us' vs 'them'?Nigel_Foremain said:yes, but you could argue that they were not chosen as slaves because they were a different race, simply that they were from a different "tribe", or maybe spoke a different language, or were from a lesser social order. Race as we understand it now is almost certainly a very modern concept.
Interestingly the fall of Rome arguably was caused when some Roman elites refused to continue the practice of integration in attempt to make Rome great again, which heightened tensions with Gaulish and Germanic generals who would otherwise have been granted Roman citizenship, and instead ended up warring with the Roman state.
But also also, there is a reason why we talk about racism today. Because the European colonial powers and their racist policies are barely a lifetime out of memory, and very much affect people today. Things like that spectator article that did the rounds asking if Normans should give reparations to Anglo Saxons miss the point that the impacts of those issues are now gone to the wayside due to time and other factors. We accept the logic when it comes to reparations for Jewish victims of the Holocaust, but when the British Empire extracted the wealth of India to benefit those living in England (for example) the idea of reparations become unthinkable.0 -
It's almost as if Boris wants to VoNCed immediately...williamglenn said:
Oh dear. He’s a hardcore Good Friday Agreement denier.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
The one that says nothing about customs checks?williamglenn said:
Oh dear. He’s a hardcore Good Friday Agreement denier.TheScreamingEagles said:
0 -
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
1 -
Nope. Parliament even passed an Act confirming that that was not the case: Church of Scotland Act 1921ydoethur said:
Scotland has an established church as well.Theuniondivvie said:
I see you've skipped from the idea of the English state to the British state and back again.TOPPING said:
Yes of course I would you big banana because that's what it is. The Church of England (there is a hint in there) is the STATE church and only a protestant can become king or queen.Roger said:
No! Would you?TOPPING said:
Would you call England a Christian State?Roger said:
If we lived somewhere where Boris's favourite love Island contestant wasn't front page news it would be possible for Corbyn and co to start asking sensible questions whether it is desirable for Israel to describe itslf as a Jewish State' and to question Mark Regev- ex Israeli propaganda chief current Israeli Ambassador to London-'s part in the continuous stories-real and false-about Corbyn's so called 'anti semitism'.ydoethur said:
If we leave aside the 2015 revelation that Corbyn was a friend and supporter of Paul Eisen, this has now been a constant running sore for over a year.TheScreamingEagles said:
At what point would a sensible person have got a grip?
What would you call it?
I love these quaint old English..er..British traditions.
0 -
Actually to a large extent we did give them freedom, and education, and protection from oppression, and courts which were fairer than anything known before. Certainly for many Indians life was better under the British Empire than it was under the rule of capricious and despotic (and racist) Mughals or some of the Hindu princes. It is as absurd to see the British Empire as an unmitigated evil as it is to see it through rose-tinted spectacles as beyond reproach.148grss said:
I don't think I claimed it was. India had it's own class and caste system, with religious and racial animus I am sure. But the fact we took the wealth and installed our own political class meant that they had to deal with those issues on top of Imperialism. Had the British not turned up maybe they would have dealt with that in their own time, in their own way, and made a better job of it than post Imperial India. The point is the Empire didn't give them that freedom, it was taken by the point of a gun. As someone who has personally benefited from that, I think it is only fair to point it out and try to redress the issue.0 -
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
1 -
I “predicted” this a week ago.HYUFD said:
Perhaps Peston is reading these threads which is a bit of a worry because I am basically a guy in his pants on the sofa (metaphorically, I’m actually in a shirt and slacks at the office right now.)0 -
F1: nice but fairly long article about F1 rule changes, particularly tyres:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/49009359
Worth recalling that at the start of the hybrid era, Williams was the closest challenger to Mercedes. Major changes can lead to a serious shift in the pecking order. McLaren and Renault will be looking to make a great leap forward, and Red Bull going from occasional wins to claiming titles again.0 -
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.1 -
So when Shagger Johnson appoints the bigot McVey to his cabinet.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.0 -
I will call out any homophobe - from whatever background. Indeed, I have already condemned McVey very clearly on here on a number of occasionsTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Shagger Johnson appoints the bigot McVey to his cabinet.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.1 -
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.0 -
That ruled it did not have to take orders from the government, but at the same time it confirmed it as the national and civic Church of Scotland, as it had been since being officially established in 1560.StuartDickson said:
Nope. Parliament even passed an Act confirming that that was not the case: Church of Scotland Act 1921ydoethur said:
Scotland has an established church as well.Theuniondivvie said:
I see you've skipped from the idea of the English state to the British state and back again.TOPPING said:
Yes of course I would you big banana because that's what it is. The Church of England (there is a hint in there) is the STATE church and only a protestant can become king or queen.Roger said:
No! Would you?TOPPING said:
Would you call England a Christian State?Roger said:
If we lived somewhere where Boris's favourite love Island contestant wasn't front page news it would be possible for Corbyn and co to start asking sensible questions whether it is desirable for Israel to describe itslf as a Jewish State' and to question Mark Regev- ex Israeli propaganda chief current Israeli Ambassador to London-'s part in the continuous stories-real and false-about Corbyn's so called 'anti semitism'.ydoethur said:
If we leave aside the 2015 revelation that Corbyn was a friend and supporter of Paul Eisen, this has now been a constant running sore for over a year.TheScreamingEagles said:
At what point would a sensible person have got a grip?
What would you call it?
I love these quaint old English..er..British traditions.0 -
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.0 -
There are umpteen models for that - to a greater or lesser extent everyone from McDonnell to Blair is somewhere on the ideological-pragmatic scale. Scandinavia is still the obvious example of reasonably equal societies achieved with high taxes but lots of private enterprise. Labour retains an attachment to public ownership of natural monopolies (like water supply and rail) but the main focus is really on public services.Zephyr said:
Nick, is there such a thing as living in the past left wing, and living in the 21st century left wing? In that it’s the end result you are trying to achieve, and non prescriptive on what achieves that quickly, cheaply and effectively?NickPalmer said:
Actually I think a lot of voters who are anti-Corbyn are willing to accept a pretty left-wing programme as preferable to the current Government - I think Southam for one has said as much. What is less clear is what that group will do if they live in marginal Con-Lab seats and it's Boris vs Corbyn.AndyJS said:There's no point in Labour getting rid of Corbyn if they replaced him with another person most voters would regard as very left-wing, like RLB. They need to replace him with a moderate like Yvette Cooper or Tom Watson.
0 -
Well nice anecdote. Kids aren't stupid. And if your boys haven't had these new lessons it backs up my point. If they have and that's what you attribute their non-confusedness to well I will have to take that on board given my social science training.TheScreamingEagles said:
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.0 -
I think if you had added that it was equally wrong for patents to tell their children that god says same sex relationships are wrong you may have a point. Same sex relationships exist and the pupils need to understand that those in them are not inferior by virtue of that relationship.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.0 -
Lots of my dearest and oldest friends are gay/bi and they’ve spent so much time with them from very early ages, they are aware that same sex relationships are normal.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Well nice anecdote. Kids aren't stupid. And if your boys haven't had these new lessons it backs up my point. If they have and that's what you attribute their non-confusedness to well I will have to take that on board given my social science training.TheScreamingEagles said:
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
It doesn’t phase them in the slightest.0 -
I trust they are trying to set you up on blind dates?TheScreamingEagles said:
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
0 -
We always did though....oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.0 -
Rail is not a natural monopoly. Quite apart from the fact that different companies can compete over the same or similar routes, rail faces natural competition from car, air, coach and bus transport.NickPalmer said:
There are umpteen models for that - to a greater or lesser extent everyone from McDonnell to Blair is somewhere on the ideological-pragmatic scale. Scandinavia is still the obvious example of reasonably equal societies achieved with high taxes but lots of private enterprise. Labour retains an attachment to public ownership of natural monopolies (like water supply and rail) but the main focus is really on public services.Zephyr said:
Nick, is there such a thing as living in the past left wing, and living in the 21st century left wing? In that it’s the end result you are trying to achieve, and non prescriptive on what achieves that quickly, cheaply and effectively?NickPalmer said:
Actually I think a lot of voters who are anti-Corbyn are willing to accept a pretty left-wing programme as preferable to the current Government - I think Southam for one has said as much. What is less clear is what that group will do if they live in marginal Con-Lab seats and it's Boris vs Corbyn.AndyJS said:There's no point in Labour getting rid of Corbyn if they replaced him with another person most voters would regard as very left-wing, like RLB. They need to replace him with a moderate like Yvette Cooper or Tom Watson.
0 -
I don’t think “No Deal” is at all understood.
The man in the street is too busy watching the cricket and thinking about his holidays.
Brexiters, if they even have a coherent concept of “No Deal”, assume it is an extension of “Project Fear”.
Remainers, for whom No Deal is probably equally misunderstood, assume it’s just not going to happen because someone sane will intervene.
No Deal is seriously misunderstood, and seriously underpriced.0 -
Okay. You're being very diplomatic. Let's not use your children as devices in this argument. (PS - I'm sure you're a great dad)TheScreamingEagles said:
Lots of my dearest and oldest friends are gay/bi and they’ve spent so much time with them from very early ages, they are aware that same sex relationships are normal.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Well nice anecdote. Kids aren't stupid. And if your boys haven't had these new lessons it backs up my point. If they have and that's what you attribute their non-confusedness to well I will have to take that on board given my social science training.TheScreamingEagles said:
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
It doesn’t phase them in the slightest.0 -
I think rail does have a monopoly for a lot of London commuters.david_herdson said:
Rail is not a natural monopoly. Quite apart from the fact that different companies can compete over the same or similar routes, rail faces natural competition from car, air, coach and bus transport.NickPalmer said:
There are umpteen models for that - to a greater or lesser extent everyone from McDonnell to Blair is somewhere on the ideological-pragmatic scale. Scandinavia is still the obvious example of reasonably equal societies achieved with high taxes but lots of private enterprise. Labour retains an attachment to public ownership of natural monopolies (like water supply and rail) but the main focus is really on public services.Zephyr said:
Nick, is there such a thing as living in the past left wing, and living in the 21st century left wing? In that it’s the end result you are trying to achieve, and non prescriptive on what achieves that quickly, cheaply and effectively?NickPalmer said:
Actually I think a lot of voters who are anti-Corbyn are willing to accept a pretty left-wing programme as preferable to the current Government - I think Southam for one has said as much. What is less clear is what that group will do if they live in marginal Con-Lab seats and it's Boris vs Corbyn.AndyJS said:There's no point in Labour getting rid of Corbyn if they replaced him with another person most voters would regard as very left-wing, like RLB. They need to replace him with a moderate like Yvette Cooper or Tom Watson.
0 -
This is a Wrong opinion. For a start, quite a lot of children live in families where there are same-sex relationships, so it can hardly be "too young" for those children to learn about the facts of their own families. Then, we don't want those children to be bullied at school. The opposite, in fact: we want those children to be accepted and loved by their peers, on the basis that there is nothing abnormal about them or their families. For this ethos to exist, the school cannot stick its head in the sand, but must address the matter head-on. Even in schools/classes where it might be determined that none of the children's families contain same-sex relationships (and I'm not sure why any (head)teacher would assume this anyway) it's surely right for schools to mitigate prejudice by referencing the equality of all people in society. Even if a school is somewhat homogeneous, it doesn't exist in a bubble, and it's right for schools to prepare children to accept difference.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
3 -
This isn't play. This is hard reality.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
Mental health diagnoses in the straight community - 25%
Mental health diagnoses in the LGBT+ communities - 40%+ (in some sectors, 70%)
This is the reality - your attempt to turn it into some sort of game is distasteful at best.
Primary school kids should be taught that about all the forms of relationships that we recognise as a society. It does ZERO harm and, indeed, reduces it.
Gender is a very modern concept - and you are showing your ignorance by not understanding what it means.
So stop playing and try educating yourself as to what is actually going on in society.1 -
It is not A FORM of Judaism it is simply Judaism. ALL Orthodox Jews believe that same sex relationship are sinful. That is just the tip of the iceburg but I can't be bothered to go through all 630 rules.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
In other news the drummer of Jamiroquoi is playing in a Villefranche bar 20 meters from here tonight. Do I go to that or the reworking of Lion King at the open air cinema. Life's a bitch in the EU......0 -
Still, TSE should know the difference between phase and faze.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Okay. You're being very diplomatic. Let's not use your children as devices in this argument. (PS - I'm sure you're a great dad)TheScreamingEagles said:
Lots of my dearest and oldest friends are gay/bi and they’ve spent so much time with them from very early ages, they are aware that same sex relationships are normal.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Well nice anecdote. Kids aren't stupid. And if your boys haven't had these new lessons it backs up my point. If they have and that's what you attribute their non-confusedness to well I will have to take that on board given my social science training.TheScreamingEagles said:
My boys, both under 10, have been to a few same sex weddings, the only thing that confused them was who gets to throw the bouquet, because they want Daddy to catch it.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
It doesn’t phase them in the slightest.0 -
Yes, but you also have more insight and instinct for politics than Peston.Gardenwalker said:
I “predicted” this a week ago.HYUFD said:
Perhaps Peston is reading these threads which is a bit of a worry because I am basically a guy in his pants on the sofa (metaphorically, I’m actually in a shirt and slacks at the office right now.)
Peston is useful to follow because he's a well-connected idiot, which means that lots of people leak to him (or spin him a line).0 -
Disappointing that this needs to be said.Dadge said:
This is a Wrong opinion. For a start, quite a lot of children live in families where there are same-sex relationships, so it can hardly be "too young" for those children to learn about the facts of their own families. Then, we don't want those children to be bullied at school. The opposite, in fact: we want those children to be accepted and loved by their peers, on the basis that there is nothing abnormal about them or their families. For this ethos to exist, the school cannot stick its head in the sand, but must address the matter head-on. Even in schools/classes where it might be determined that none of the children's families contain same-sex relationships (and I'm not sure why any (head)teacher would assume this anyway) it's surely right for schools to mitigate prejudice by referencing the equality of all people in society. Even if a school is somewhat homogeneous, it doesn't exist in a bubble, and it's right for schools to prepare children to accept difference.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
And @JBriskinindyref2 what the f&&k does "let kids be kids" mean?1 -
Rail might be most convenient for many London commuters but other options, from tube to bus to car will exist. In the medium term, relocation - either of living or working location - also becomes an option. It's not a natural monopoly in the same way that, say, water is.tlg86 said:
I think rail does have a monopoly for a lot of London commuters.david_herdson said:
Rail is not a natural monopoly. Quite apart from the fact that different companies can compete over the same or similar routes, rail faces natural competition from car, air, coach and bus transport.NickPalmer said:
There are umpteen models for that - to a greater or lesser extent everyone from McDonnell to Blair is somewhere on the ideological-pragmatic scale. Scandinavia is still the obvious example of reasonably equal societies achieved with high taxes but lots of private enterprise. Labour retains an attachment to public ownership of natural monopolies (like water supply and rail) but the main focus is really on public services.Zephyr said:
Nick, is there such a thing as living in the past left wing, and living in the 21st century left wing? In that it’s the end result you are trying to achieve, and non prescriptive on what achieves that quickly, cheaply and effectively?NickPalmer said:
Actually I think a lot of voters who are anti-Corbyn are willing to accept a pretty left-wing programme as preferable to the current Government - I think Southam for one has said as much. What is less clear is what that group will do if they live in marginal Con-Lab seats and it's Boris vs Corbyn.AndyJS said:There's no point in Labour getting rid of Corbyn if they replaced him with another person most voters would regard as very left-wing, like RLB. They need to replace him with a moderate like Yvette Cooper or Tom Watson.
0 -
0
-
What are you doing in Peston's pants?Gardenwalker said:
I “predicted” this a week ago.HYUFD said:
Perhaps Peston is reading these threads which is a bit of a worry because I am basically a guy in his pants on the sofa (metaphorically, I’m actually in a shirt and slacks at the office right now.)0 -
You always do!TheScreamingEagles said:@Richard_Nabavi - I’m blaming auto correct.
Yes, auto correct.0 -
Just over 20% of Jews consider themselves to be Orthodox - it is very much a branch of Judaism - not all of it.Roger said:
It is not A FORM of Judaism it is simply Judaism. ALL Orthodox Jews believe that same sex relationship are sinful. That is just the tip of the iceburg but I can't be bothered to go through all 630 rules.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
In other news the drummer of Jamiroquoi is playing in a Villefranche bar 20 meters from here tonight. Do I go to that or the reworking of Lion King at the open air cinema. Life's a bitch in the EU......1 -
Yes I'm well aware it's a wrong opinion.Dadge said:
This is a Wrong opinion. For a start, quite a lot of children live in families where there are same-sex relationships, so it can hardly be "too young" for those children to learn about the facts of their own families. Then, we don't want those children to be bullied at school. The opposite, in fact: we want those children to be accepted and loved by their peers, on the basis that there is nothing abnormal about them or their families. For this ethos to exist, the school cannot stick its head in the sand, but must address the matter head-on. Even in schools/classes where it might be determined that none of the children's families contain same-sex relationships (and I'm not sure why any (head)teacher would assume this anyway) it's surely right for schools to mitigate prejudice by referencing the equality of all people in society. Even if a school is somewhat homogeneous, it doesn't exist in a bubble, and it's right for schools to prepare children to accept difference.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
If a child is raised by a same sex couple - why the hell would they need to learn about that at School?
And as for the other kids - is there really a reason for this to be tackled head-on (phrasing)
Anyway - the argument is already over. The lessons are happening and there's no turning back now.
(Edit - he's posted, I shall respond)Would be nice if oxfordsimon could turn up to call me a bigot though.0 -
Interesting that Labour now has a bigger homophobia problem than the Tories. Quite the turnaround since the 80s !1
-
May getting some good questions here after her speech.0
-
A child with same sex parents should have their family acknowledged in their educationJBriskinindyref2 said:
Yes I'm well aware it's a wrong opinion.
If a child is raised by a same sex couple - why the hell would they need to learn about that at School?
And as for the other kids - is there really a reason for this to be tackled head-on (phrasing)
Anyway - the argument is already over. The lessons are happening and there's no turning back now.
(Edit - he's posted, I shall respond)Would be nice if oxfordsimon could turn up to call me a bigot though.
Children who share a classroom with such a child need to be shown that a same sex relationship is valid, legal and of equal status to that of a heterosexual relationship.
But then you know this.
1 -
It usually is auto correct.Richard_Nabavi said:
You always do!TheScreamingEagles said:@Richard_Nabavi - I’m blaming auto correct.
Yes, auto correct.
Or Siri unable to understand my Yorkshire accent.
Today it was all me.0 -
Having told us that No Deal is not going to be a problem, it will be interesting to see how long Johnson gets away with blaming the EU for all the difficulties that emerge once it actually happens.0
-
I was wondering who was going to pick me up on my misuse of gender/sex - We have a winnar.oxfordsimon said:
This isn't play. This is hard reality.JBriskinindyref2 said:
I'll play.oxfordsimon said:
Given the high suicide rates in young LGBT+ communities, I think you can argue that giving even a shred of credibility to this bigot is doing serious harm.RobD said:
A step up from the IRA, though. At least he isn’t trying to kill people.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
I'm with the muslims & catholics (and apparently a jewish person) on this one.
1. Primary school too young to be learning same sex relationships "let kids be kids"
2. You can't change your gender. Castor is Castor and want's to be female and that's fine and other female atheletes should just have to up their game. Chopping off dicks (Especially pre-18) is just wrong.
Mental health diagnoses in the straight community - 25%
Mental health diagnoses in the LGBT+ communities - 40%+ (in some sectors, 70%)
This is the reality - your attempt to turn it into some sort of game is distasteful at best.
Primary school kids should be taught that about all the forms of relationships that we recognise as a society. It does ZERO harm and, indeed, reduces it.
Gender is a very modern concept - and you are showing your ignorance by not understanding what it means.
So stop playing and try educating yourself as to what is actually going on in society.
And I know it's not a game. Somethings happening that I disagree with and for once I'm on the same side as the muslims.
Despite Stuart D's statements I am actually interested in politics.
I think your mental health stats are a very weak play (I know it's not a game). I have a mental health diagnosis - apparently black people (I'm more diluted) have eight times the mental health illness rate. So what?
0 -
We await Owen Jones responses with bated breath. Between Muslim and Jewish fundamentalism it may be squeaky bum time for our OwenScott_P said:0 -
NEW THREAD 🧵
0 -
If I was the EU at this stage (and it’s unclear to me who “owns” Brexit strategy in the EU during this interregnum) do I have much incentive to alter the WA?
After all, if I hold fast, I might be able to trigger a VONC in the House of Commons and foil Boris at the outset, leading to either a GONU or a GE.0 -
May accepts that she shouldn't have used some of the language she used earlier post-referendum.0
-
At last!TOPPING said:May accepts that she shouldn't have used some of the language she used earlier post-referendum.
Sadly, May is one of the progenitors of the Ovenden window we are currently hurling ourselves through.0 -
Of course I'm not talking about people who just happen to have a Jewish Mother. I'm talking about every practising Orthodox Jew. The Hasidim have taken it much further. You can recognise them by their dress and hair and hats.You really have to be extremely cautious about referring to people like Charedi as bigots. They are far more 'Jewish' than most claiming the heritage.oxfordsimon said:
Just over 20% of Jews consider themselves to be Orthodox - it is very much a branch of Judaism - not all of it.Roger said:
It is not A FORM of Judaism it is simply Judaism. ALL Orthodox Jews believe that same sex relationship are sinful. That is just the tip of the iceburg but I can't be bothered to go through all 630 rules.oxfordsimon said:
Looking more into that particular person, there is no way any political leader should be inviting him to lunch. He is a bigot plain and simple. He might justify it as a result of his choice to follow a particular form of Judaism. But he is still a bigot.Scott_P said:
A bigot who supported the protests outside the Birmingham schools.
Yet Corbyn is happy to invite him round for lunch.
Thanks Jezza.
Not ok to sit down next to Chuka, but perfectly fine to sit down next to a homophobic bigot.
We know now where Corbyn's priorities lay.
In other news the drummer of Jamiroquoi is playing in a Villefranche bar 20 meters from here tonight. Do I go to that or the reworking of Lion King at the open air cinema. Life's a bitch in the EU......0 -
Dear Selectors for the Cheating Convicts
Please, please, pretty please with almonds on pick Chad Sayers for the Ashes.
Not only will it mean England win handsomely, but it means Glos can sign a halfway competent bowler.0 -
Wow so a minister who leaked info to the papers will be deputy PM.
Can one imagine the furore if Labour did this in government . Of course the right wing press won’t say a thing about Bozo putting Williamson in the cabinet .
The country is truly fucked .0 -
He'll probably try to convince us all it's 1940, he's Churchill and No Deal is the same as Dunkirk and the Blitz.SouthamObserver said:Having told us that No Deal is not going to be a problem, it will be interesting to see how long Johnson gets away with blaming the EU for all the difficulties that emerge once it actually happens.
0 -
Without going all Monty Python Yorkshireman its not always possible to 'have it all' at your age.Gallowgate said:
Yes? What has that got to do with my living arrangements?another_richard said:
Weren't you complaining that you can't afford a holiday ?Gallowgate said:
Good job I bought a house in the North East of England last summer... 👀AlastairMeeks said:Quite pleased about my decision to sell my London flat last year:
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1151412204543074304
Though IMO buying a house is the right thing to do even if it means you can't afford a holiday for a while.0
This discussion has been closed.