Braverman set to defect to Reform (no, not that one, yet) – politicalbetting.com

rottenborough said:

‪Phillips OBrien‬ ‪@phillipspobrien.bsky.social‬
·
8m
Looks like Assad wanted a ride and not ammunition.

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

rottenborough said:

Want a Job in the Trump Administration? Be Prepared for the Loyalty Test.

"The interviewers asked which candidate the applicants had supported in the three most recent elections, what they thought about the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and whether they believed the 2020 election was stolen. The sense they got was that there was only one right answer to each question."

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/07/us/politics/trump-administration-loyalty-test.html?smtyp=cur&smid=bsky-nytimes

HYUFD said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

If I get sick and want to end my own suffering through physician-assisted death you want to deny my right to do so, because of your religion that I do not share with you.

You want to impose your religious choices on others. You do all the time.

Rightly so, I don't believe in state assisted killing of the innocent but then nor do many atheists like Baroness Tanni Grey Thompson.

In a democracy religious people are as entitled to exercise their vote based on what they believe as you atheists are

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

Stuartinromford said:

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

Yes, but probably only once Mr G Reaper has intervened.

Eabhal said:

ydoethur said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

I did the same before it all got more expensive

What temperatures do you do?

19.

It used to be 18, but be warned damp can become a bit of an issue over a long period at that temperature.

18, 15 overnight. I have the dehumidifier running 24/7 and it's a revelation - clothes dry overnight, heating is much more efficient. Up there with electric toothbrushes, Garmin smartwatches and microspikes as brilliant purchases I should have made earlier.

After 10 years of living in mouldy tenements, I think it's the perfect example of how a little capital investment (£200) can improve your life significantly.

ohnotnow said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

I am not sure Jesus would like anyone to be burnt at the stake, and certainly He would be far more forgiving, kind and generous than anything I have read you say about Christianity

HY is sent to this plain to test the patience of Christ. It's a toughie.

linto said:

ohnotnow said:

Eabhal said:

ydoethur said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

I did the same before it all got more expensive

What temperatures do you do?

19.

It used to be 18, but be warned damp can become a bit of an issue over a long period at that temperature.

18, 15 overnight. I have the dehumidifier running 24/7 and it's a revelation - clothes dry overnight, heating is much more efficient. Up there with electric toothbrushes, Garmin smartwatches and microspikes as brilliant purchases I should have made earlier.

After 10 years of living in mouldy tenements, I think it's the perfect example of how a little capital investment (£200) can improve your life significantly.

As a tenement dweller - can I ask which model/make you got?

I used to have an EBAC one as they were built over the road from where I worked in Bishop Auckland. Normally pretty reasonably priced. If you can get one that can be plumbed in to spare you the minor hassle of having to empty it.

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

mwadams said:

JohnLilburne said:

Benpointer said:

JohnLilburne said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

I did the same before it all got more expensive

What temperatures do you do?

I'm on 18, but I have had to turn it up to 19 at the weekend if I have been at home for lengthy periods. I have noticed that 18 with the radiators on feels warmer than 19 without them on, as you get the radiated heat from the radiators.

When I am at work, and overnight (9pm to about 6am) the heating is off.

Pah! 21 all year round, except the en-suite, which is set to 23*.

But I bet our heating costs were lower than most: Insulation, Insulation, Air-tightness.

(*That's our old house tbf - not the one we are currently renting while we build our new one.)

I used to be on 21 but a couple of years ago when fuel prices went up I slowly reduced the temperature by half a degree at a time to work out what I could cope with. If it's too warm to wear a jumper, I reckon I'm wasting my money.

I try to sneak it down to 19 but my other half has special thermostat feet that instantly detect the 2 degree shift.

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

Nigelb said:

Didn’t have this on my Covid bingo card, but there are plenty of viruses implicated in cancer.

The risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma following SARS-CoV family infection

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92068-4
This research aimed to evaluate the possible correlation between infection with SARS-CoV viruses and cancer in an in-silico study model. To do this, the relevent dataset was selected from GEO database. Identification of differentially expressed genes among defined groups including SARS-CoV, SARS-dORF6, SARS-BatSRBD, and H1N1 were screened where the |Log FC| ≥ 1and p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Later, the pathway enrichment analysis and gene ontology (GO) were used by Enrichr and Shiny GO databases. Evaluation with STRING online was applied to predict the functional interactions of proteins, followed by Cytoscape analysis to identify the master genes. Finally, analysis with GEPIA2 server was carried out to reveal the possible correlation between candidate genes and cancer development. The results showed that the main molecular function of up- and down-regulated genes was “double-stranded RNA binding” and actin-binding, respectively. STRING and Cytoscape analysis presented four genes, PTEN, CREB1, CASP3, and SMAD3 as the key genes involved in cancer development. According to TCGA database results, these four genes were up-regulated notably in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Our findings suggest that pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the most probably malignancy happening after infection with SARS-CoV family...</i>

Large scale observational studies ought to confirm whether or not this is a real concern.

Foxy said:

ohnotnow said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

I am not sure Jesus would like anyone to be burnt at the stake, and certainly He would be far more forgiving, kind and generous than anything I have read you say about Christianity

HY is sent to this plain to test the patience of Christ. It's a toughie.

No wonder he doesn't post on PB any more.

Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

NIV Matthew 4:7

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Shecorns88 said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Stuartinromford said:

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

Yes, but probably only once Mr G Reaper has intervened.

Talking of which, the Gorgeous Dylan Difford chart of moving votes.



https://bsky.app/profile/dylandifford.bsky.social/post/3lcsdqpnuy22k

So there's some real hacked-offness, but probably also some tactical snapback ("I'm really a Liberal Democrat supporter, but I'll end up voting Labour to keep the Tories out.")

And there's a little white square in the Labour column- 100k or so Labour voters who were too young to vote on July 4. And a little blue square on the right of the chart of about 100k Conservative voters who won't be voting next time. That's after five months.

The age profile on the Conservative vote never used to be this steep, which is why they never died out before.

And in 2019 most voters over 39 voted Tory, the age profile of the Tories is only so high when they lose heavily as in July.

If voters become ever more fed up of Labour they will swing back again and note on that chart the Conservatives are now winning 4 July Labour voters to them for every 1 July Tory voter lost to Labour

Jesus wept.

We are 5 months in to a 60 month term

The past 14 years have left the UK broken, economically, socially, physically, mentally

The political dementors (the tories) have sucked every last bit of positivity our of everything.

Many now quoting pointless surveys were adamant on July 3rd that there would be a hung parliament.

Weren't you?
.
I know, I was watching, looking in, laughing.

I'm laughing now, bellycose laughing.

What I can't work out is who do you think you are kidding.

Each other?
Your egos?
Your alta egos?
The inner troll in you?
The Bookies?

The Tories are a busted flush led by a part time split personality intellectual desert

The Lib Dems are led by a nice man part time clown

Reform are led by a narcissistic spiv

Labour are led by a working class boy, who made it to the very top of a toff profession grounded in Class culture, headed and reformed a major Department of State and rebuilt an utterly broken Labour Party to win the biggest majority in modern history

He has the most grounded, rounded record of achievement of any Prime Minister in recent history.

Oh and he will be well trained to make, build and restore the UK. You may not know this, his father was a toolamker.

We should rejoice rejoice rejoice that we are no longer led by a witch,the shagger of an egg eater, a GMTV tea boy, a robotic dancer, a drug addled serial liar, merchant banking midget, nor Liz fecking Truss aka lettuce...

Arise Sir Keir...

The saviour of the nation.

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Badenoch isn’t doing to try and widen the vote base is she?

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Didn’t have this on my Covid bingo card, but there are plenty of viruses implicated in cancer.

The risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma following SARS-CoV family infection

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92068-4
This research aimed to evaluate the possible correlation between infection with SARS-CoV viruses and cancer in an in-silico study model. To do this, the relevent dataset was selected from GEO database. Identification of differentially expressed genes among defined groups including SARS-CoV, SARS-dORF6, SARS-BatSRBD, and H1N1 were screened where the |Log FC| ≥ 1and p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Later, the pathway enrichment analysis and gene ontology (GO) were used by Enrichr and Shiny GO databases. Evaluation with STRING online was applied to predict the functional interactions of proteins, followed by Cytoscape analysis to identify the master genes. Finally, analysis with GEPIA2 server was carried out to reveal the possible correlation between candidate genes and cancer development. The results showed that the main molecular function of up- and down-regulated genes was “double-stranded RNA binding” and actin-binding, respectively. STRING and Cytoscape analysis presented four genes, PTEN, CREB1, CASP3, and SMAD3 as the key genes involved in cancer development. According to TCGA database results, these four genes were up-regulated notably in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Our findings suggest that pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the most probably malignancy happening after infection with SARS-CoV family...</i>

Large scale observational studies ought to confirm whether or not this is a real concern.

Since it is believed over 95% of us have had Covid, they must struggle to do these correlations based on so few people who haven’t ?

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

ohnotnow said:

Eabhal said:

ydoethur said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

I did the same before it all got more expensive

What temperatures do you do?

19.

It used to be 18, but be warned damp can become a bit of an issue over a long period at that temperature.

18, 15 overnight. I have the dehumidifier running 24/7 and it's a revelation - clothes dry overnight, heating is much more efficient. Up there with electric toothbrushes, Garmin smartwatches and microspikes as brilliant purchases I should have made earlier.

After 10 years of living in mouldy tenements, I think it's the perfect example of how a little capital investment (£200) can improve your life significantly.

As a tenement dweller - can I ask which model/make you got?

Carnyx said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Ok one problem solved, the “mystery” drone in the NBC News still image is clearly this:

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/advanced-air-mobility/pivotal-slips-helix-deliveries-improve-personal-evtol

A personal electric aircraft with vertical take off and landing. Not from Neptune

How come I was able to work this out in 20 minutes in a hotel in Cartagena but the editorial staff of NBC news were not?

NBC want you to click on their site? You've been baited to do that.

If only there were a term for that.

How come I was able to work this out in 20 seconds and you could not?

I have just explained a global mystery while sitting in the golden lobby of my hotel in Cartagena, Colombia; you are wanking about in your y-fronts in a redbrick Barratt home new build semi in Newent

You're the only one who finds clickbait a mystery.

Maybe one day you'll learn enough to realise why the rest of us aren't interested.

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

Ok one problem solved, the “mystery” drone in the NBC News still image is clearly this:

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/advanced-air-mobility/pivotal-slips-helix-deliveries-improve-personal-evtol

A personal electric aircraft with vertical take off and landing. Not from Neptune

How come I was able to work this out in 20 minutes in a hotel in Cartagena but the editorial staff of NBC news were not?

NBC want you to click on their site? You've been baited to do that.

If only there were a term for that.

How come I was able to work this out in 20 seconds and you could not?

I have just explained a global mystery while sitting in the golden lobby of my hotel in Cartagena, Colombia; you are wanking about in your y-fronts in a redbrick Barratt home new build semi in Newent

You're the only one who finds clickbait a mystery.

Maybe one day you'll learn enough to realise why the rest of us aren't interested.

That article says "Pivotal says it has delayed customer deliveries of its Helix personal electric vertical-takeoff-and-landing (eVTOL) aircraft to 2025".

Time travel UFOs, then?

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Still your God though, up to all that mischief.

Oh, and then there's the time he drowned everyone except for one family who were tipped off to build a boat. But they had to go and fetch a pair of kangaroos, snow leopards, sloths and every other land animal first, as the rest of their species were all drowned too.

What an absolute psycho. Makes all the other gods look like woke snowflakes.

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Is that REALLY a recommendation? Do you think that encourages ‘belief’.
Writing as a relatively recent to atheism.

Pro_Rata said:

Leon said:

Reports of pro and anti Assad fighting in Manchester. Brilliant. It’s all going so well

https://x.com/Tauroctonia/status/1865832671584084288?t=wqJzqx0yli46qLj02b9CxQ&s=19

So, hashtag search shows one guy, Mithras, showing 3 videos, one possibly or not showing one guy remonstrating amongst a large crowd, one showing a few people running (possibly from trouble), and one showing cars driving through beeping.

If there is large scale fisticuffs going on in a corner of any of these shots, it is not front and centre nor obvious to me, nevertheless the echo chamber of chuck them out is in full effect.

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

"Heretics like you"

Enough said.

"I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level."

You posited banning them from working between those ages. Setting that aside, your belief that the falling fertility rate is all women's fault infests your posts like lice; you routinely fail to acknowledge that men have a role as well. Despite your so-called 'family' stance. You are little different from ISIS/L.

Men need their role of being largely the breadwinners and traditional fathers and loyal to their wives too no doubt.

However most men have not become house husbands and fathers over the past 50 years, it is more wives and single women who have become full time workers. Not necessarily always by choice, government should do more to support stay at home mothers or mothers wishing only to work part time.

If I was ISIL I would be advocating death for homosexuals and death for non Muslims, which would include me as much as you

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.

What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

"Heretics like you"

Enough said.

"I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level."

You posited banning them from working between those ages. Setting that aside, your belief that the falling fertility rate is all women's fault infests your posts like lice; you routinely fail to acknowledge that men have a role as well. Despite your so-called 'family' stance. You are little different from ISIS/L.

Men need their role of being largely the breadwinners and traditional fathers and loyal to their wives too no doubt.

However most men have not become house husbands and fathers over the past 50 years, it is more wives and single women who have become full time workers. Not necessarily always by choice, government should do more to support stay at home mothers or mothers wishing only to work part time.

If I was ISIL I would be advocating death for homosexuals and death for non Muslims, which would include me as much as you

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Still your God though, up to all that mischief.

Oh, and then there's the time he drowned everyone except for one family who were tipped off to build a boat. But they had to go and fetch a pair of kangaroos, snow leopards, sloths and every other land animal first, as the rest of their species were all drowned too.

What an absolute psycho. Makes all the other gods look like woke snowflakes.

Saved the righteous and each species of animal

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Is that REALLY a recommendation? Do you think that encourages ‘belief’.
Writing as a relatively recent to atheism.

If one is a Jew wishing to preserve ones race and nation from those trying to eliminate both, of course.

Jews just have the Old Testament God of course, they don't believe he transferred into Jesus as in the New

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

Reminder that @HYUFD was certain that the majority Alawite coastal region of Syria was going to fight until the bitter end and refused to entertain any suggestion otherwise. They didn’t.

Well Latakia and Tartus, the 2 biggest cities in the coastal Alawite heartland of Syria, have still not yet fallen to the rebels.

Assuming they and the rest of the coastal region where the Alawites are based falls who knows what reprisals the rebels will then ultimately pursue against the Alawites and their links to the Assad family

From "the Russians will bomb the rebel cowards" to "our small bases have not yet fallen!"

It's been quite a week for you, hasn't it? Wrong at every step.

Far from it, come back this time next year and we will see if Syria is the liberal peaceful nirvana you insist it will be or full of jihadis again.

I am in this argument for the long haul, even if it takes a year, 5 years or a decade

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

“If we don’t defend our culture, who will?” – Badenoch’s Washington speech in full'

Kemi Badenoch’s speech to the International Democracy Union Forum in Washington DC:
https://conservativehome.com/2024/12/07/if-we-dont-defend-our-culture-who-will-badenochs-washington-speech-in-full/

https://thecritic.co.uk/badenochs-muscular-liberalism-is-a-non-starter/

The Conservatives lost, says Badenoch, because of “talking Right, but governing Left”. There’s truth to that. But she isn’t clear on what this means. “There was complacency about the nature of the enemy we were fighting,” she says, “Because a lot of people did not recognise it for what it was.” It’s true that the Conservatives allowed outright leftists to prosper, with jobs and patronage (see Charlie Peters’ excellent article “Why do the Tories love to promote their enemies?”). But it wasn’t leftists who created the historic rise in immigration that Patrick O’Flynn calls “the Tory flood”. It was, well — the Tories, with Badenoch among them. To shift the blame onto a shapeless “enemy” is to avoid serious introspection.

Stuartinromford said:

Nobody enjoys admitting that they themselves stuffed up, and are largely the authors of their own downfall. So it's human to contort reality so that isn't so. (It's only one of the reasons why politics is hard and populism so attractive.)

david_herdson said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

Reminder that @HYUFD was certain that the majority Alawite coastal region of Syria was going to fight until the bitter end and refused to entertain any suggestion otherwise. They didn’t.

Well Latakia and Tartus, the 2 biggest cities in the coastal Alawite heartland of Syria, have still not yet fallen to the rebels.

Assuming they and the rest of the coastal region where the Alawites are based falls who knows what reprisals the rebels will then ultimately pursue against the Alawites and their links to the Assad family

From "the Russians will bomb the rebel cowards" to "our small bases have not yet fallen!"

It's been quite a week for you, hasn't it? Wrong at every step.

Far from it, come back this time next year and we will see if Syria is the liberal peaceful nirvana you insist it will be or full of jihadis again.

I am in this argument for the long haul, even if it takes a year, 5 years or a decade

I have never insisted it will be a 'liberal peaceful nirvana' this time next year. I have repeatedly stated it could go either way.

But Syria stands more chance of being at peace than it did with the stalemate with Assad in charge. Perhaps it will be worse; perhaps it will be better. But it is now up to the Syrians, and not the Assads, Russians and Iranians, to decide the future of their country.

We can hope, and work,for Syria to become a happier, more prosperous country. You appear to want it to fail, as it was a failed state under Assad.

Shecorns88 said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Stuartinromford said:

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

Yes, but probably only once Mr G Reaper has intervened.

Talking of which, the Gorgeous Dylan Difford chart of moving votes.



https://bsky.app/profile/dylandifford.bsky.social/post/3lcsdqpnuy22k

So there's some real hacked-offness, but probably also some tactical snapback ("I'm really a Liberal Democrat supporter, but I'll end up voting Labour to keep the Tories out.")

And there's a little white square in the Labour column- 100k or so Labour voters who were too young to vote on July 4. And a little blue square on the right of the chart of about 100k Conservative voters who won't be voting next time. That's after five months.

The age profile on the Conservative vote never used to be this steep, which is why they never died out before.

And in 2019 most voters over 39 voted Tory, the age profile of the Tories is only so high when they lose heavily as in July.

If voters become ever more fed up of Labour they will swing back again and note on that chart the Conservatives are now winning 4 July Labour voters to them for every 1 July Tory voter lost to Labour

Jesus wept.

We are 5 months in to a 60 month term

The past 14 years have left the UK broken, economically, socially, physically, mentally

The political dementors (the tories) have sucked every last bit of positivity our of everything.

Many now quoting pointless surveys were adamant on July 3rd that there would be a hung parliament.

Weren't you?
.
I know, I was watching, looking in, laughing.

I'm laughing now, bellycose laughing.

What I can't work out is who do you think you are kidding.

Each other?
Your egos?
Your alta egos?
The inner troll in you?
The Bookies?

The Tories are a busted flush led by a part time split personality intellectual desert

The Lib Dems are led by a nice man part time clown

Reform are led by a narcissistic spiv

Labour are led by a working class boy, who made it to the very top of a toff profession grounded in Class culture, headed and reformed a major Department of State and rebuilt an utterly broken Labour Party to win the biggest majority in modern history

He has the most grounded, rounded record of achievement of any Prime Minister in recent history.

Oh and he will be well trained to make, build and restore the UK. You may not know this, his father was a toolamker.

We should rejoice rejoice rejoice that we are no longer led by a witch,the shagger of an egg eater, a GMTV tea boy, a robotic dancer, a drug addled serial liar, merchant banking midget, nor Liz fecking Truss aka lettuce...

Arise Sir Keir...

The saviour of the nation.

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

“If we don’t defend our culture, who will?” – Badenoch’s Washington speech in full'

Kemi Badenoch’s speech to the International Democracy Union Forum in Washington DC:
https://conservativehome.com/2024/12/07/if-we-dont-defend-our-culture-who-will-badenochs-washington-speech-in-full/

https://thecritic.co.uk/badenochs-muscular-liberalism-is-a-non-starter/

The Conservatives lost, says Badenoch, because of “talking Right, but governing Left”. There’s truth to that. But she isn’t clear on what this means. “There was complacency about the nature of the enemy we were fighting,” she says, “Because a lot of people did not recognise it for what it was.” It’s true that the Conservatives allowed outright leftists to prosper, with jobs and patronage (see Charlie Peters’ excellent article “Why do the Tories love to promote their enemies?”). But it wasn’t leftists who created the historic rise in immigration that Patrick O’Flynn calls “the Tory flood”. It was, well — the Tories, with Badenoch among them. To shift the blame onto a shapeless “enemy” is to avoid serious introspection.

HYUFD said:

Shecorns88 said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Stuartinromford said:

kle4 said:

Goddamnit they will never stop

Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

Yes, but probably only once Mr G Reaper has intervened.

Talking of which, the Gorgeous Dylan Difford chart of moving votes.



https://bsky.app/profile/dylandifford.bsky.social/post/3lcsdqpnuy22k

So there's some real hacked-offness, but probably also some tactical snapback ("I'm really a Liberal Democrat supporter, but I'll end up voting Labour to keep the Tories out.")

And there's a little white square in the Labour column- 100k or so Labour voters who were too young to vote on July 4. And a little blue square on the right of the chart of about 100k Conservative voters who won't be voting next time. That's after five months.

The age profile on the Conservative vote never used to be this steep, which is why they never died out before.

And in 2019 most voters over 39 voted Tory, the age profile of the Tories is only so high when they lose heavily as in July.

If voters become ever more fed up of Labour they will swing back again and note on that chart the Conservatives are now winning 4 July Labour voters to them for every 1 July Tory voter lost to Labour

Jesus wept.

We are 5 months in to a 60 month term

The past 14 years have left the UK broken, economically, socially, physically, mentally

The political dementors (the tories) have sucked every last bit of positivity our of everything.

Many now quoting pointless surveys were adamant on July 3rd that there would be a hung parliament.

Weren't you?
.
I know, I was watching, looking in, laughing.

I'm laughing now, bellycose laughing.

What I can't work out is who do you think you are kidding.

Each other?
Your egos?
Your alta egos?
The inner troll in you?
The Bookies?

The Tories are a busted flush led by a part time split personality intellectual desert

The Lib Dems are led by a nice man part time clown

Reform are led by a narcissistic spiv

Labour are led by a working class boy, who made it to the very top of a toff profession grounded in Class culture, headed and reformed a major Department of State and rebuilt an utterly broken Labour Party to win the biggest majority in modern history

He has the most grounded, rounded record of achievement of any Prime Minister in recent history.

Oh and he will be well trained to make, build and restore the UK. You may not know this, his father was a toolamker.

We should rejoice rejoice rejoice that we are no longer led by a witch,the shagger of an egg eater, a GMTV tea boy, a robotic dancer, a drug addled serial liar, merchant banking midget, nor Liz fecking Truss aka lettuce...

Arise Sir Keir...

The saviour of the nation.

..Or the destroyer of business owners, farmers and pensioners

SandyRentool said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

Freed the Jews from slavery though.

The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New

Still your God though, up to all that mischief.

Oh, and then there's the time he drowned everyone except for one family who were tipped off to build a boat. But they had to go and fetch a pair of kangaroos, snow leopards, sloths and every other land animal first, as the rest of their species were all drowned too.

What an absolute psycho. Makes all the other gods look like woke snowflakes.

Saved the righteous and each species of animal

And thus spake Sunil unto his PB Disciples: "Know ye that the Lord God did NOT marry the mother of His only begotten son."

And the lord god* said to Sunil "Know that ye have sinned, and ye shall be moderated until ye repenteth"

OK, that was the Rail Forum moderators, not the lord god, but near enough.

david_herdson said:

Pagan2 said:

david_herdson said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

JosiasJessop said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation

You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.

In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state

You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

That is your mistake.

Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...

You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.

Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is

Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.

You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

"whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument.

If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…

Indeed not.
He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.

Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews

The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.

I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...

Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt

Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.