politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes online poll sees Lab lead down one to two – But are

@nigel4england
I am afraid not, you will have to learn for yourself why fear generates hate, and hatred has no reason.

TheScreamingEagles said:

NickPalmer said:

AndyJS said:

The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. The Netherlands might be slightly ahead of us.

Citation needed? About average in my view, though much less so than it used to be and certainly less than France and Russia. I'd give the Americans credit for being a bit ahead of us, and the Germans too - they have their racists but the depth of loathing for racism among most people is much greater, because of the national experience of it.

By the way, I think we need to make a distinction between people who say they'd like to have sharia law or an Islamic state, and people who attempt violence or intimidation. The former is permissible (freedom of opinion and all that), the latter not. At present I can't see why this requires a new law of any kind, and I'm opposed to "crushing" any peacefully-expressed opinion. Too much of the "we had to destroy freedom in order to save it" thinking about that.

Does Trevor Philips count as a citation?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1121442/TREVOR-PHILLIPS-Why-Britain-LEAST-racist-country-Europe.html

Also this recent British Social Attitudes Survey

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/britain-becoming-less-racist

Not really. Trevor doesn't seem to mention Europe in the piece even though the Mail's headline-writer does, and he tacitly concedes America is less racist. The BSAS shows we're less racist than we were, which I'm sure is true.

Anyway, it's not really a competition - main thing is that it's improved. Overt racism is now extraordinarily rare

NickPalmer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

NickPalmer said:

AndyJS said:

The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. The Netherlands might be slightly ahead of us.

Citation needed? About average in my view, though much less so than it used to be and certainly less than France and Russia. I'd give the Americans credit for being a bit ahead of us, and the Germans too - they have their racists but the depth of loathing for racism among most people is much greater, because of the national experience of it.

By the way, I think we need to make a distinction between people who say they'd like to have sharia law or an Islamic state, and people who attempt violence or intimidation. The former is permissible (freedom of opinion and all that), the latter not. At present I can't see why this requires a new law of any kind, and I'm opposed to "crushing" any peacefully-expressed opinion. Too much of the "we had to destroy freedom in order to save it" thinking about that.

Does Trevor Philips count as a citation?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1121442/TREVOR-PHILLIPS-Why-Britain-LEAST-racist-country-Europe.html

Also this recent British Social Attitudes Survey

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/britain-becoming-less-racist

Not really. Trevor doesn't seem to mention Europe in the piece even though the Mail's headline-writer does, and he tacitly concedes America is less racist. The BSAS shows we're less racist than we were, which I'm sure is true.

Anyway, it's not really a competition - main thing is that it's improved. Overt racism is now extraordinarily rare

I'd also cite for example in this country, a party like Front National has never even come close to winning a nationwide election.

For me this sums up how wonderful this country is, from Roderick Spode, the best thing we've done is laugh at the extremists

Makes you proud to be British

Far-Right Extremists Chased Through London by Women Dressed as Badgers

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bnp-edl-hate-fascist-badgers-473597

@nigel4england
No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you.
Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.

@nigel4england
I will explain it all to you later Nigel, when you have become a big boy. and have stopped being scared of monsters your mind creates.

@Charles
Of course many don't, and neither do many on the right.
Public ownership of the means of production is as insane as the "free market". They are ideological fortresses we retreat to when the "enemy appears".

I can't wait to see the back of Grayling as Justice Secretary. Banning the one thing prisoners should be permitted - books - was an unforgivable error IMO.

Spectator article:

"Porn-agains: meet the middle-aged men - and women - warped by internet porn

Society's anxiety about online porn has been so focused on the young that its impact on the older generation has gone largely unnoticed"

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9275381/porn-agains-meet-the-middle-aged-men-and-women-warped-by-internet-porn/

In honour of the Stuart Dickson memorial prize for selective use of Scottish sub-samples:

How favourable or unfavourable are you towards Scottish Independence (fav/unfav)
Scotland: 45:36
OA: 14:49

http://comres.co.uk/polls/SM_IoS_Political_Poll_24th_August_2014_12371.pdf

Table 21

Smarmeron said:

@RobD
It is more to do with the content of the book I think?
Checking a book for contraband should be reasonably easy though.

If it really was about content, then that is pretty bad, however I have only seen references to smuggling as a reason.

Smarmeron said:

RobD
How long would it take to run it through a scanner, and let "fred" the sniffer dog give it a nose?

My point exactly... daft ban.

@RobD
Yes, it is patently daft. But you can then only really conclude that is must be a ban on the content?
The other option is, whoever made the ruling should be considering his/her position?

Charles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This story did make me smile, possibly NSFW

Ann Summers apologises after launching a range of underwear with the same name as terrorist group ISIS

Ann Summers said they named the ISIS lingerie range 'months' ago

The company said the range is named after the Egyptian fertility goddess Isis

Ann Summers said they are totally opposed to violence and terrorism

The Isis range features thongs, suspenders, bras and a babydoll

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2732768/Ann-Summers-apologises-launching-range-underwear-terrorist-group-ISIS.html

ISIS should really have been called ISIL - Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

I'd vote for Sunnis Unleashed in Northern Iraq and the Levant

So how did ISIL become ISIS? Levant begins with an L in English!

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Charles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This story did make me smile, possibly NSFW

Ann Summers apologises after launching a range of underwear with the same name as terrorist group ISIS

Ann Summers said they named the ISIS lingerie range 'months' ago

The company said the range is named after the Egyptian fertility goddess Isis

Ann Summers said they are totally opposed to violence and terrorism

The Isis range features thongs, suspenders, bras and a babydoll

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2732768/Ann-Summers-apologises-launching-range-underwear-terrorist-group-ISIS.html

ISIS should really have been called ISIL - Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

I'd vote for Sunnis Unleashed in Northern Iraq and the Levant

So how did ISIL become ISIS? Levant begins with an L in English!

S = syria.

RobD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Charles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This story did make me smile, possibly NSFW

Ann Summers apologises after launching a range of underwear with the same name as terrorist group ISIS

Ann Summers said they named the ISIS lingerie range 'months' ago

The company said the range is named after the Egyptian fertility goddess Isis

Ann Summers said they are totally opposed to violence and terrorism

The Isis range features thongs, suspenders, bras and a babydoll

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2732768/Ann-Summers-apologises-launching-range-underwear-terrorist-group-ISIS.html

ISIS should really have been called ISIL - Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

I'd vote for Sunnis Unleashed in Northern Iraq and the Levant

So how did ISIL become ISIS? Levant begins with an L in English!

S = syria.

As-Sham = Levant.

dugarbandier said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Charles said:

As a Christian, I find it impossible to believe that a loving God would wish people excluded from the joys of lifelong commitment as expressed in marriage.

Shame God didn't marry the mother of His Only Begotten Son

would have been bigamy?

Mary could have left a mere carpenter to marry a deity!

Smarmeron said:

@nigel4england
No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you.
Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.

"Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering!" - Master Yoda.

@Smarmeron
I assumed you would have read Dune, but in case you haven't


I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.[2]

You don't think for a minute that I didn't take that into consideration when I posted that link and raised my concerns? But, hey, this is the Daily Mail, their online site is so successful that circulation of this article was guaranteed despite my concerns! Maybe I should just have posted a mysterious comment alluding to an article by a mainstream UK newspaper online and raising my concerns, and then left you all to go on a newspaper hunt to find the right article that was freely available to anyone! What patronising prat.

isam said:

fitalass said:

I am very uncomfortable with the Mail running this article, it is very irresponsible IMHO.
Daily Mail - SAS high-tech hunt for the killers of James Foley: 'Significant force' of UK elite troops on ground in Iraq

glw said:

Stark_Dawning said:

volcanopete said:

When is Cameron going to get a grip?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/23/observer-editorial-isis-cameron-foreign-policy

That editorial is laughable. In the end its only recommendation is that Dave should deliver a lecture.

'What is missing is a narrative from Britain's political leader that is strong on clarity and firm on logic. He is in a position where he could contribute to – and even lead – a meaningful, nuanced and robust discussion about what current events in Iraq tell us about the delicate tribal, economic and religious issues at play and what part Britain played in that narrative over the last 10 years.'

When Libya kicked off in 2011 lots of left wingers, both politicians and journalists, were ranting about government inaction and predicting a hostage crisis. In reality MI6 and UK special forces were already in Libya, and very successfully rounded up British citizens, and safely got them out of the country. Some of them had to leave via Hercules aircraft that landed on airfields our soldiers secured in the desert. The government kept shtum while all this was happening.

I suspect that the UK is very much involved in taking action against ISIS now, for obvious reasons, but we won't know about it until it's all over.

The government needs no advice from the likes of the Observer.

So you thought you'd link to it!?! Genius

Almost certainly true in the UK also:

Which intoxicating substance is associated with the most lethal violence? Devotees of the Wire might presume that cocaine or maybe heroin would top the list, especially if you asked the worst causes of violence in poor, minority communities.

The correct answer, by far, is alcohol. It’s involved in more homicides than pretty much every other substance, combined. Alcohol’s relative importance has grown over the last fifteen years, as aging populations of cocaine users account for a declining proportion of violent crime.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/19/alcohol-is-still-the-deadliest-drug-in-the-united-states-and-its-not-even-close/

FPT demolishing the UKIP are Tories on holiday - compare & contrast their attitudes to intervention in the current a Middle East mess: (net approve)

Con/UKIP:

RAF dropping humanitarian supplies: +77 / +58
US air strikes: +65 / +41
RAF participating in air strikes: +31 / +10
Britain arming Kurds: +7 / -10
Britain sending troops to train anti-ISIS: -11 / -37
Britain giving asylum to homeless Iraqi Christians: -11 / -44

CarlottaVance said:

For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/08/why-bigger-isnt-always-better/

Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.

I question whether people talking face to face on the doorstep wish to be seen as travelling on the populist wave of independence, whereas when dealing with pollsters they are more likely to reflect what they are likely to do in the privacy of the polling booth.

I further question whether the polarised and sometimes aggressive nature of the debate, makes it even more likely that those being doorstepped will choose the "Yes dear" option, both to maker life easier, and so they can get back to the telly.

nigel4england said:

Smarmeron said:

@nigel4england
Catholicism and Protestantism need crushed as well do they? Hinduism and Buddhism and every other "ism"?

No, nor Judaism.

Just those who do not wish to live within our society, the way we have lived for centuries in the British way of life. Is that too much to expect?

Just curious: All of the ism's mentioned still have their militant minorities who would like to change the UK to fit their dream and everyone else's nightmares.

Take a look at the history of these Isles. We have had brutal Catholicism and Protestantism, there has been mass murder of Jews (York), civil wars, racist pogroms and discrimination. Heck, one town even managed to hang a monkey because they thought he was french.

One of the great things about this country is now our consensus of ignoring or even laughing at some of the extreme bigotry and intolerance.

However, by your argument, all forms of religous extremism and any other ism you dislike or disapprove of, should be banned on pain of death.

I suspect that should your ideas come about, that the population of the UK would decrease dramatically, until, at the last, only you were alive.

Of course, all this is just speculation. I, personally, tend more to militant atheism as I believe that religons have been a curse on this planet ... AAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sunil_Prasannan said:

GIN1138 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

GIN1138 said:

Champagne's staying on ice for now...

@TheScreamingEagles

"Don't Fail Me Again... Mr Eagles"!

Three hours till this week's Sunil on Sunday publishes its ELBOW

Will The Sunil be able to find it's ELBOW from JackW's ARSE?

Well, JackW will certainly be able to discern his ARSE from our ELBOW!

He is too busy making an ARSE of himself in Edinburgh

Edin_Rokz said:

CarlottaVance said:

For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/08/why-bigger-isnt-always-better/

Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.

And I am to disagree with a SNumPtie who chaps on my door, holding a clipboard with a piece of paper on which is my name and address and a box alongside waiting for a tick or a cross??

Er! No!

Any normal person would just tell the truth unless they were spineless.

Considering these polls were taken in areas where you would not normally knock someones door and try to intimidate them and the people knocking are not likely to be hard nuts, I doubt many would be intimidated into giving false information.

"Well, JackW will certainly be able to discern his ARSE from our ELBOW!"

Och it's gruesome!!


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_SRTBaafRZfw/TOq_839e-hI/AAAAAAAAFLw/Cg18gonIXkY/s1600/queen_and_soldiers.jpg