Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Zoe Williams' lip-quivering anguish at the findings is amusing to read.
I love the headline
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Zarah Sultana MP @zarahsultana · 1h We’ve reached 230,000 sign ups! That’s more than Reform’s membership.
It’s just an online expression of interest, with no payment involved. Nor self verification.
She remains utterly deluded. Her sole function is to deliver a far right Government, which is diametrically opposed to her entire ideology. Although I am sure Corbyn will get off on asking Farage some very testing questions about Palestine at PMQs. Although they do have common ground, they both quite like Putin.
No, no, no.
The ideology is that you need to deliver the Far, Far, Far Right government so that the whole system collapses and everyone joins in the Pure Socialist Revolution.
The fact that every time this has been tried, it has ended up with a vast past of death people and completely failed is down to the Purity of the Revolution not being pure enough.
It's all about the Purity of vital essence. You see, it really was a Commie plot.....
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Zoe Williams' lip-quivering anguish at the findings is amusing to read.
I love the headline
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
The woman is a grade A moron. Irrespective of the column.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Zoe Williams' lip-quivering anguish at the findings is amusing to read.
I love the headline
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
“Unless the authorities revisit their commitment not to increase taxes on ‘working people’, further spending prioritisation will be required to align better the scope of public services with available resources,” the IMF said.
“The triple lock could be replaced with a policy of indexing the state pension to the cost of living.
“Access to public services could also depend more on an individual’s capacity to pay, with charges levied on higher-income users, such as co-payments for health services, while shielding the vulnerable.
“There may also be scope to expand means testing of benefits.”
England settling in for the hard grind bit of the innings. I hope they don't get becalmed, though; that tends to lead to wickets.
Still averaging 4.5 an over. For the first time I can recall in this excellent series this is not looking particularly competitive. India really needing to do some thinking at lunch and come up with some new ideas.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
Remember,
- "a rogue poll" is one where you disagree with a BPC valid poll. - "A pollster who should be investigated/banned" is one who regularly produces BPC valid polls that you don't like.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Do them Muslamics 'ave ray guns? Asking for a member of the Trump administration.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Perhaps this one. Numbers look the same as the article. Commissioned by Ahmadiyya Muslim Association?
I'm quite interested in context. Leon's "“More than half of the public think Islam is not compatible with British values, according to a survey." is one data point - and that is fine.
But there's a "views about Muslims" tracker on the Yougov site, which uses a vocabulary of whether Muslim values 'clash' with British values, which suggests that the number for the 'clash' question was down from 55% yes to 45% yes between 2015 and 2019, when the series stopped.
So background and nuance is needed.
(My position is we need to see evolution of Islam to a state "where everyone else can live comfortably with it." My telltale is Muslim countries discontinuing to use the death penalty within a notionally Sharia system, of which there are several. People tend to miss that Sharia is very like British Common Law - a tradition which evolves. In 1400 British Common Law was disembowelling people and in 1600 was putting their heads on spikes.)
England settling in for the hard grind bit of the innings. I hope they don't get becalmed, though; that tends to lead to wickets.
Still averaging 4.5 an over. For the first time I can recall in this excellent series this is not looking particularly competitive. India really needing to do some thinking at lunch and come up with some new ideas.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Zoe Williams' lip-quivering anguish at the findings is amusing to read.
I love the headline
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
Are you trying to get yourself banned from PB
If you can now get banned for citing a valid and interesting poll by a respected pollster then there isn’t much hope for PB
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Tried but nope, still don't understand you
Fuxake, have you had a blow to the head?
'Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down'
Would a 'lock the Muzzies up' white nationalist type be devastated by these findings or feel gratified & validated by them?
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Leon woke up (with the usual headache), rushed straight on to Twitter and searched on ‘Islam’, and now for the trillionth day running he’s wanting to play “am I over the line yet?” with our hard-working mods.
And has the cheek to accuse some of this forum’s more thoughtful posters of being “boring”.
It's a good survey looking at who commission it. They wish to preach and convert more to Islam so attitudes to Islam would be their starting point. But as said upthread, they have a lot a work to do to overcome negative attitudes. More so that those of the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh and Christian faith. Those wishing to convert people to secularism were not asked.
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Do them Muslamics 'ave ray guns? Asking for a member of the Trump administration.
I remember, a while back, a regular here telling us that the existence of aliens would be confirmed imminently.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Zoe Williams' lip-quivering anguish at the findings is amusing to read.
I love the headline
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
Are you trying to get yourself banned from PB
Leon's humble-bragging, please could one of you give him some credit for his small part in poisoning the public discourse.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Tried but nope, still don't understand you
Fuxake, have you had a blow to the head?
'Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down'
Would a 'lock the Muzzies up' white nationalist type be devastated by these findings or feel gratified & validated by them?
I tried one last time to understand this drivel, and failed again. Soz
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Leon woke up (with the usual headache), rushed straight on to Twitter and searched on ‘Islam’, and now for the trillionth day running he’s wanting to play “am I over the line yet?” with our hard-working mods.
And has the cheek to accuse some of this forum’s more thoughtful posters of being “boring”.
It's a good survey looking at who commission it. They wish to preach and convert more to Islam so attitudes to Islam would be their starting point. But as said upthread, they have a lot a work to do to overcome negative attitudes. More so that those of the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh and Christian faith. Those wishing to convert people to secularism were not asked.
Yes - I agree on that. I said recently that the Ahmadis are a very interesting group, along with the later version of the Muslim Parliament if that was still going.
There was a very interesting reading room provided by Ahmadis just off the campus of Bradford University when I was there in the mid-1980s. It was one of the things that started me trying to understand Islam in the UK. There was also a chap called iirc Philip Davis working for the Bishop of Bradford who used to run interesting study days to help British people understand the Muslim Community.
Zarah Sultana MP @zarahsultana · 1h We’ve reached 230,000 sign ups! That’s more than Reform’s membership.
It’s just an online expression of interest, with no payment involved. Nor self verification.
She remains utterly deluded. Her sole function is to deliver a far right Government, which is diametrically opposed to her entire ideology. Although I am sure Corbyn will get off on asking Farage some very testing questions about Palestine at PMQs. Although they do have common ground, they both quite like Putin.
Now now, Corbyn at least does not like Putin, he's just in denial about how his foreign policy views align very well with Putin on some major issues.
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Tried but nope, still don't understand you
Fuxake, have you had a blow to the head?
'Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down'
Would a 'lock the Muzzies up' white nationalist type be devastated by these findings or feel gratified & validated by them?
I tried one last time to understand this drivel, and failed again. Soz
In the words of Alan Partridge - That was just a noise
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Perhaps this one. Numbers look the same as the article. Commissioned by Ahmadiyya Muslim Association?
I'm quite interested in context. Leon's "“More than half of the public think Islam is not compatible with British values, according to a survey." is one data point - and that is fine.
But there's a "views about Muslims" tracker on the Yougov site, which uses a vocabulary of whether Muslim values 'clash' with British values, which suggests that the number for the 'clash' question was down from 55% yes to 45% yes between 2015 and 2019, when the series stopped.
So background and nuance is needed.
(My position is we need to see evolution of Islam to a state "where everyone else can live comfortably with it." My telltale is Muslim countries discontinuing to use the death penalty within a notionally Sharia system, of which there are several. People tend to miss that Sharia is very like British Common Law - a tradition which evolves. In 1400 British Common Law was disembowelling people and in 1600 was putting their heads on spikes.)
Islam is very diverse. (Christianity is very diverse. Judaism is very diverse. Buddhism is very diverse. Atheism is very diverse. Even Scientology is more diverse than you'd imagine.) It is thus difficult to actually pin down Muslim values.
But then it is difficult to pin down British values. There are very different views as to what those are.
So, the question of whether there is a clash between two things, both of which are diverse and contested, is impossible to answer simply. That said, the poll is still interesting to tell us what people's views are.
It would be interesting to poll the question in a different way. Ask, "Do you know someone who is Muslim? Do their views clash with British values?"
Oh, it would also be interesting to poll people in what do they think Muslim values are.
Former PBer Tim has been sent mad by the Zarah & Jezza show, from mostly howling into the void on twitter over the Labour left & Unions with a side order of whining about Owen Jones, the Greens and Nats, he's gone full centrist dad on the Your Party ass. Worse than Leon with an Incompatible With British Values Yougov.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Tried but nope, still don't understand you
That's pretty concerning for a man with your IQ. Have you mentioned this to your GP?
I think Hunt would make a fine Leader of the Opposition in normal times - but these are not normal times. The Tories are on the verge of dropping to fourth.
I really don't like Jenrick, and he should be ruled out due to the stench of corruption emanating from his dealings in government, but it feels like he's the pugilistic political street fighter that the Tories need right now. That's in part what they thought they were getting with Badenoch - someone spiky and energetic who would take the fight to the other parties - but she's been a bit like a rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Once the Tories have survived the challenge from Reform and the Lib Dems, and retained their status as the official opposition, then they can move on to a more broadly reassuring figure like Hunt (supposing an individual with real leadership ability hasn't emerged in the interim).
What is right now depends, quantum like, on the future. As a competitor in Reform's space, Jenrick is qualified to be the leader who loses such centre voters the Tories still have, and succeeds in splitting the Jenrick/Farage vote so that like Aesop's scorpions they kill each other and, at about 23% each, they come joint second well behind Labour, who, with 27/28% of the vote form the next government with LD/SNP support.
But if Jenrick means a Tory Reform electoral pact, then it is formidable, though unwelcome to me. Such a pact will win fairly easily.
In the unlikely event that the Tories wanted to rediscover role, purpose, principle, policy and a bit of hard truth telling, then Hunt looks like the only candidate for now, though not a stellar one.
Given Britain's use of the FPTP system the first task for a Tory leader is to ensure that they remain the leading party to the right of centre. This means that they absolutely must eclipse Reform and Farage. Where they fall relative to Labour is a secondary concern (though, of course, they should not admit this).
This is a historical account. A radical Tory leader might start to accept that outside the extremes the terms 'left' and 'right' have no special use because we are all slightly differing shades of social democrat. This IMO includes Reform, though for proof we shall have to await events.
Finding a place for Conservatism which ignores platitudinous fact free distinctions of left and right, and starts to think what might be a model for society once the 1945 - the present day social democrat consensus has run its course would be useful.
(The only remotely serious non social-democrats in visible politics are Corbyn style genuinely socialist and properly libertarian movements).
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Perhaps this one. Numbers look the same as the article. Commissioned by Ahmadiyya Muslim Association?
I'm quite interested in context. Leon's "“More than half of the public think Islam is not compatible with British values, according to a survey." is one data point - and that is fine.
But there's a "views about Muslims" tracker on the Yougov site, which uses a vocabulary of whether Muslim values 'clash' with British values, which suggests that the number for the 'clash' question was down from 55% yes to 45% yes between 2015 and 2019, when the series stopped.
So background and nuance is needed.
(My position is we need to see evolution of Islam to a state "where everyone else can live comfortably with it." My telltale is Muslim countries discontinuing to use the death penalty within a notionally Sharia system, of which there are several. People tend to miss that Sharia is very like British Common Law - a tradition which evolves. In 1400 British Common Law was disembowelling people and in 1600 was putting their heads on spikes.)
Islam is very diverse. (Christianity is very diverse. Judaism is very diverse. Buddhism is very diverse. Atheism is very diverse. Even Scientology is more diverse than you'd imagine.) It is thus difficult to actually pin down Muslim values.
But then it is difficult to pin down British values. There are very different views as to what those are.
So, the question of whether there is a clash between two things, both of which are diverse and contested, is impossible to answer simply. That said, the poll is still interesting to tell us what people's views are.
It would be interesting to poll the question in a different way. Ask, "Do you know someone who is Muslim? Do their views clash with British values?"
Oh, it would also be interesting to poll people in what do they think Muslim values are.
The guardian did it not more than a couple of years ago
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Was he the copper?
In my long-haired student period I was wandering down the road at 2am when Thames Valley's finest pounced and invited me for a ride in their panda car. Apparently they were looking for someone last seen breaking into a butcher's shop. "Wouldn't have been me," I trilled, "I'm a vegetarian". The copper stared at me as if I was a complete and utter imbecile. "They weren't looking for meat," he said.
Former PBer Tim has been sent mad by the Zarah & Jezza show, from mostly howling into the void on twitter over the Labour left & Unions with a side order of whining about Owen Jones, the Greens and Nats, he's gone full centrist dad on the Your Party ass. Worse than Leon with an Incompatible With British Values Yougov.
Tim, like myself, has long been howling at the moon over Corbyn. How long is the transition from Corbyn Derangement Syndrome to PB Tory?
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Perhaps this one. Numbers look the same as the article. Commissioned by Ahmadiyya Muslim Association?
I'm quite interested in context. Leon's "“More than half of the public think Islam is not compatible with British values, according to a survey." is one data point - and that is fine.
But there's a "views about Muslims" tracker on the Yougov site, which uses a vocabulary of whether Muslim values 'clash' with British values, which suggests that the number for the 'clash' question was down from 55% yes to 45% yes between 2015 and 2019, when the series stopped.
So background and nuance is needed.
(My position is we need to see evolution of Islam to a state "where everyone else can live comfortably with it." My telltale is Muslim countries discontinuing to use the death penalty within a notionally Sharia system, of which there are several. People tend to miss that Sharia is very like British Common Law - a tradition which evolves. In 1400 British Common Law was disembowelling people and in 1600 was putting their heads on spikes.)
Islam is very diverse. (Christianity is very diverse. Judaism is very diverse. Buddhism is very diverse. Atheism is very diverse. Even Scientology is more diverse than you'd imagine.) It is thus difficult to actually pin down Muslim values.
But then it is difficult to pin down British values. There are very different views as to what those are.
So, the question of whether there is a clash between two things, both of which are diverse and contested, is impossible to answer simply. That said, the poll is still interesting to tell us what people's views are.
It would be interesting to poll the question in a different way. Ask, "Do you know someone who is Muslim? Do their views clash with British values?"
Oh, it would also be interesting to poll people in what do they think Muslim values are.
The guardian did it not more than a couple of years ago
That's asking Muslims in the UK about their views on certain issues. I was pondering a survey asking non-Muslims in the UK what they think Muslim values are.
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Was he the copper?
In regular life - I think he was the only one. Apart from an activist type who got herself arrested in Turkey back when it was run by the military.
As a student, I was helping run the student union. Which meant helping students out of trouble, very often. It was harder to say which was more prevalent - students getting arrested or students getting pregnant.
EDIT: The Saffa Student Hall of Residence warden who got lifted due to a misunderstanding about grow lamps and biltong was someone I knew off, wouldn't say a friend.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Is this written in some scotch dialect? You’ll have to translate
I mean you'd be devastated if the polling tables didn't indicate that there's a big British Values war on Muslamics and Woke in the offing, but you'd be feverishly excited if there was.
Tried but nope, still don't understand you
That's pretty concerning for a man with your IQ. Have you mentioned this to your GP?
Shame as she seemed to be in politics to achieve change rather than be professional politicians like the Alexanders. Hope she can wash out the taint of politics and resume her desire for change.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Presumably they would only be pretty devastating findings for you if after drilling down it suggested most people didn't give a toss about Islam. Is that the case?
Leon woke up (with the usual headache), rushed straight on to Twitter and searched on ‘Islam’, and now for the trillionth day running he’s wanting to play “am I over the line yet?” with our hard-working mods.
And has the cheek to accuse some of this forum’s more thoughtful posters of being “boring”.
Fake News.
The trillion days have been punctuated by several, both short and lengthier early baths, and a not insubstantial number of regenerations.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
I think Hunt would make a fine Leader of the Opposition in normal times - but these are not normal times. The Tories are on the verge of dropping to fourth.
I really don't like Jenrick, and he should be ruled out due to the stench of corruption emanating from his dealings in government, but it feels like he's the pugilistic political street fighter that the Tories need right now. That's in part what they thought they were getting with Badenoch - someone spiky and energetic who would take the fight to the other parties - but she's been a bit like a rabbit frozen in the headlights.
Once the Tories have survived the challenge from Reform and the Lib Dems, and retained their status as the official opposition, then they can move on to a more broadly reassuring figure like Hunt (supposing an individual with real leadership ability hasn't emerged in the interim).
What is right now depends, quantum like, on the future. As a competitor in Reform's space, Jenrick is qualified to be the leader who loses such centre voters the Tories still have, and succeeds in splitting the Jenrick/Farage vote so that like Aesop's scorpions they kill each other and, at about 23% each, they come joint second well behind Labour, who, with 27/28% of the vote form the next government with LD/SNP support.
But if Jenrick means a Tory Reform electoral pact, then it is formidable, though unwelcome to me. Such a pact will win fairly easily.
In the unlikely event that the Tories wanted to rediscover role, purpose, principle, policy and a bit of hard truth telling, then Hunt looks like the only candidate for now, though not a stellar one.
Given Britain's use of the FPTP system the first task for a Tory leader is to ensure that they remain the leading party to the right of centre. This means that they absolutely must eclipse Reform and Farage. Where they fall relative to Labour is a secondary concern (though, of course, they should not admit this).
This is a historical account. A radical Tory leader might start to accept that outside the extremes the terms 'left' and 'right' have no special use because we are all slightly differing shades of social democrat. This IMO includes Reform, though for proof we shall have to await events.
Finding a place for Conservatism which ignores platitudinous fact free distinctions of left and right, and starts to think what might be a model for society once the 1945 - the present day social democrat consensus has run its course would be useful.
(The only remotely serious non social-democrats in visible politics are Corbyn style genuinely socialist and properly libertarian movements).
Jez takes the hard unionist, flog the bankers and the Jews vote from Labour. Farage takes the shut the door / flog the criminals vote from the Tories.
You’re basically left with three wishy washy status quo parties of around 10-15% each. The Centrist Dad party. Logically they should merge and consolidate their agenda for an ever growing client welfare state, paid for by easy borders and at the cost of managed gradual decline.
Or perhaps Starmer will gamble and kill off FPTP before the next election, with the aim of them all entering a grand coalition to keep out Nasty Nigel.
Former PBer Tim has been sent mad by the Zarah & Jezza show, from mostly howling into the void on twitter over the Labour left & Unions with a side order of whining about Owen Jones, the Greens and Nats, he's gone full centrist dad on the Your Party ass. Worse than Leon with an Incompatible With British Values Yougov.
Tim had a wicked sense of humour, verging on cruel on his bad days, but he never had any time for those who wanted to spout rubbish or make spurious points rather than deal with real issues that affected real people. Its not hard to see why this new party would irritate him. Self indulgent twaddle.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Shame as she seemed to be in politics to achieve change rather than be professional politicians like the Alexanders. Hope she can wash out the taint of politics and resume her desire for change.
Well, there wasn't much change being achieved by the SNP (unless it was swapping out the people carrier....)
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Was he the copper?
In my long-haired student period I was wandering down the road at 2am when Thames Valley's finest pounced and invited me for a ride in their panda car. Apparently they were looking for someone last seen breaking into a butcher's shop. "Wouldn't have been me," I trilled, "I'm a vegetarian". The copper stared at me as if I was a complete and utter imbecile. "They weren't looking for meat," he said.
And butchers don't sell McDonalds burgers so meat is all they stock?
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
Former PBer Tim has been sent mad by the Zarah & Jezza show, from mostly howling into the void on twitter over the Labour left & Unions with a side order of whining about Owen Jones, the Greens and Nats, he's gone full centrist dad on the Your Party ass. Worse than Leon with an Incompatible With British Values Yougov.
Tim had a wicked sense of humour, verging on cruel on his bad days, but he never had any time for those who wanted to spout rubbish or make spurious points rather than deal with real issues that affected real people. Its not hard to see why this new party would irritate him. Self indulgent twaddle.
He never had any time for women either.
Plus he still owes me a gold sovereign for a bet he welched on.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
It's not the poll you moron, it is how you extrapolate the data for your own agenda.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
It is allowed to be mentioned and discussed.
What we are wanting to avoid is your pissed up rants such as taxpayers given money to have white babies.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
It's not the poll you moron, it is how you extrapolate the data for your own agenda.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
While it needs to be discussed vaguely responsibly surely it’s a subject that definitely should be discussed here. Islam is an issue that is important to a good portion of the population and this includes those who are hostile to Islam. It can potentially affect elections either through parties standing with some form of quasi Islamist standpoint or parties or individuals standing on an anti-Islamic platform.
Of all the places where people can post their views online surely this is THE best place to discuss the subject where we will be exposed to a range of views on the subject and can make our own, I hope vaguely intelligent, minds up based on argument and facts - if we can’t discuss and debate such an important subject on here then it’s a bit sad and somewhat concerning.
We discuss very contentious issues daily such as Gaza/Israel, the environment, tax, sex/gender, assisted dying and I think it’s every bit as valid to discuss Islam in the UK, whether one is pro, ambivalent or anti because we get to see a microcosm of what the electorate might think and so can view various potential political events and issues with a greater insight.
During Covid it was useful hearing from anti-vaxxers as it was a section of the voting public, we have Ukraine sceptic/Russia curious posters, and we have people with terrible taste in footwear but it’s good they post so we know what people think whether we like their views or not.
I understand and appreciate this is a private site and can make its own rules but the absolute beauty of it has been the range of views and the ability to debate difficult issues.
Former PBer Tim has been sent mad by the Zarah & Jezza show, from mostly howling into the void on twitter over the Labour left & Unions with a side order of whining about Owen Jones, the Greens and Nats, he's gone full centrist dad on the Your Party ass. Worse than Leon with an Incompatible With British Values Yougov.
Tim had a wicked sense of humour, verging on cruel on his bad days, but he never had any time for those who wanted to spout rubbish or make spurious points rather than deal with real issues that affected real people. Its not hard to see why this new party would irritate him. Self indulgent twaddle.
Tbh though not an assiduous reader of his tweets there seems very little in them, zero in fact, about how Starmer & co (who I assume are his Platonic ideal of a Labour government) are dealing with real issues that affect real people. There may be a very obvious reason for this of course.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Due to trans rights and Palestine predominantly it says.
Wings is always moaning that the SNP is full on trans activist so either something has changed or he's wrong (fair to say he doesnt tend to give the SNP benefit of the doubt).
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
While it needs to be discussed vaguely responsibly surely it’s a subject that definitely should be discussed here. Islam is an issue that is important to a good portion of the population and this includes those who are hostile to Islam. It can potentially affect elections either through parties standing with some form of quasi Islamist standpoint or parties or individuals standing on an anti-Islamic platform.
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Oh sweetie, if you think that is abusive then you’re too innocent to post on here.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Oh sweetie, if you think that is abusive then you’re too innocent to post on here.
No, I'm not allowed to be abusive in a vigirous sweary way. You specifically told us all and warned us (quite justifiably, I thought, BTW). Tho it seems you do not abide by your own rules
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Unless you're ultra sensitive about being in the vicinity of swearing, how are you being abused?
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
A touch of pedantry needed to pour oil oil the troubled waters: offence please
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clearly Samaritans are a very good thing whose shoestrings seem to be snapping.
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
The Chief Executive did a similar thing when she ran Childline, she's like a plague of locusts. If the problem is that they need more volunteers, the solution isn't going to be closing half the branches and ask people to take calls from suicidal people (and mischief makers) from home. It's a competency issue.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Very clumsily put. Although I eventually realised your critique relates to organised religion rather than the values of one particular faith.
The problem is really about trying to freeze values.
The standard, everyday values of even 1950s Britain would be unacceptable today.
The standard, everyday values of 610 Britain?
If someone showed up with the behaviour and values of the Catholic Church circa 1450... they would be a proscribed group before afternoon tea.
You can make that 1990s Britain:
When it was first published in 1991, Issues [in Human Sexuality] aimed to be sensitive, but the tone, language, and some of the assumptions are now considered inappropriate and offensive to many people.
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Oh sweetie, if you think that is abusive then you’re too innocent to post on here.
No, I'm not allowed to be abusive in a vigirous sweary way. You specifically told us all and warned us (quite justifiably, I thought, BTW). Tho it seems you do not abide by your own rules
Trust me, If I was allowed, you've know it
I wasn’t being abusive, I was sharing my exasperation at your low IQ not being able to understand things.
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Unless you're ultra sensitive about being in the vicinity of swearing, how are you being abused?
My take from the new rules was NOT to use F bombs or C drones in comments aimed at others, in any way (even if not as a personal description)
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Very clumsily put. Although I eventually realised your critique relates to organised religion rather than the values of one particular faith.
The problem is really about trying to freeze values.
The standard, everyday values of even 1950s Britain would be unacceptable today.
The standard, everyday values of 610 Britain?
If someone showed up with the behaviour and values of the Catholic Church circa 1450... they would be a proscribed group before afternoon tea.
"the behaviour and values of the Catholic Church circa 1450" does, unfortunately, describe a sizeable minority of Muslim opinion worldwide - death to gays, death to apostates, total subjugation of women, etc
It is futile to ignore this, and we are importing it
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
If you can't tell the difference between exasperation and abuse, then I seriously fear for your next cognitive test.
This faux victimhood schtick really doesn't suit you.
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clearly Samaritans are a very good thing whose shoestrings seem to be snapping.
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
The Chief Executive did a similar thing when she ran Childline, she's like a plague of locusts. If the problem is that they need more volunteers, the solution isn't going to be closing half the branches and ask people to take calls from suicidal people (and mischief makers) from home. It's a competency issue.
There seems to be a plague of such people in the Charitable/Third Sector. They are incompetent managers to a staggering degree, moving around, collapsing organisations. A common factor is their belief in "professionalisation" - by which they mean lots of reports to/for/at/or/near/by/with/or/from senior managers, as well as hiring in expensive outside agencies. To generate more reports.
The actual operation of the organisation can go hang, as far as they are concerned.
Such people also have a rabid dislike and fear of volunteerism.
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
It's not the poll you moron, it is how you extrapolate the data for your own agenda.
Show me where I extrapolated the data
The interesting bit of the “compatibility” poll is the ratio of 2:1 - no to yes. In democracies, if those sorts of opinion ratios are ignored by policy makers indefinitely, the lid blows off and you then end up with exaggerated policy responses. Widespread fatigue with key features of EU policy creep leading to full Brexit was a classic example.
What such an exaggerated policy response looks like in this case, I will leave you all to ponder. But anyone on the “yes” side of that polling question would do well to carefully consider how best to close the opinion gap before there is such an exaggerated policy reaction. Suppressing comment and debate doesn’t feel like the optimal way of going about it but what do I know.
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
Unless you're ultra sensitive about being in the vicinity of swearing, how are you being abused?
My take from the new rules was NOT to use F bombs or C drones in comments aimed at others, in any way (even if not as a personal description)
Remarkable indeed. Going by your commentary, I'd have expected those numbers to be much higher.
It would be interesting to know if a PB commenter is allowed to say “I agree with more than half the British people, and Islam is not compatible with British values”
Or would that get the commenter banned like @williamglenn on the grounds that the PB centrist dads find this opinion “unacceptable”
Centrist dad? I'm a socialist grandad, if you don't mind.
I was the Telegraph with afaics no link to the survey n the article.
And I do now know what perception of Islam was in their heads, or what they had been placed in front of them to gain their reaction.
Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down
Just checking, are YouGov acceptable to you now, because you were a bit angry at them before over the Afghan leak stuff as the findings didn’t correspond with your views?
There are a small handful of posters on here who whenever the opportunity arises pick up some obtuse Islam- hostile ball and run with it.
It may be central to the work of Farage and Anderson to whip up all kinds of nonsense. But is it necessary on here?
OGH has made it clear it isn’t necessary on here.
This poll is headline news on the Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC. And we're not allowed to mention it. Are you serious?!
It's not the poll you moron, it is how you extrapolate the data for your own agenda.
Show me where I extrapolated the data
The interesting bit of the “compatibility” poll is the ratio of 2:1 - no to yes. In democracies, if those sorts of opinion ratios are ignored by policy makers indefinitely, the lid blows off and you then end up with exaggerated policy responses. Widespread fatigue with key features of EU policy creep leading to full Brexit was a classic example.
What such an exaggerated policy response looks like in this case, I will leave you all to ponder. But anyone on the “yes” side of that polling question would do well to carefully consider how best to close the opinion gap before there is such an exaggerated policy reaction. Suppressing comment and debate doesn’t feel like the optimal way of going about it but what do I know.
Yes, See the works of David Betz, passim
We are heading for a reckoning unless there is a major course correction, very very very quickly
Is it land speculators selling off their "farms" in order to dodge the start of IHT, and genuine farmers buying it up?
Presumably the total of agricultural land in production isn't changing.
Big Agriculture, basically. Also, solar farming.
Both are usually structured as Ltd, so there won't be an inheritance tax, going forward.
Precisely this. If a company buys or leases land, there won't be IHT to pay, as companies don't pay it. Land is still attractive to speculators and big business precisely because they are using it for means other than agriculture, and cannot be taxed in the same way an individual can for IHT purposes.
If Ms Reeves wanted to hit big business, she could have set the starting limit at £5 mill or £10 mill, there won't be many corporate investors under that value. Its about drawing money out for the treasury, but even then its poorly designed
Land for solar/renewables is generally rented, which means if the backside falls out of that industry, or the company wishes to vacate, they can do easily as it'll be written into the terms of their lease. And if they wish to transfer the lease to another company, that's no problem as companies don't pay IHT
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Was he the copper?
In my long-haired student period I was wandering down the road at 2am when Thames Valley's finest pounced and invited me for a ride in their panda car. Apparently they were looking for someone last seen breaking into a butcher's shop. "Wouldn't have been me," I trilled, "I'm a vegetarian". The copper stared at me as if I was a complete and utter imbecile. "They weren't looking for meat," he said.
It's some years since I ceased being a vegetarian but I'd still go out of my way to avoid a butcher's shop.
Leon is half right, something I'd never normally say.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
Imo fundamentalism of any flavour is not consistent with British life, religion and Islam is a red herring. We should be against fundamentalist Islam as we should against fundamentalist communists or fundamentalist Trumpists.
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clearly Samaritans are a very good thing whose shoestrings seem to be snapping.
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
The Chief Executive did a similar thing when she ran Childline, she's like a plague of locusts. If the problem is that they need more volunteers, the solution isn't going to be closing half the branches and ask people to take calls from suicidal people (and mischief makers) from home. It's a competency issue.
Sounds like now just about done the hard yards for big cushy government job advising them on charity sector based upon excellent "experience".
Seriously. If this site wants to become a kind of trainspotting Bluesky, where any challenging opinions from the right, or even centre right, are blocked and excluded, then fair enough. Tell us. You don't want to hear it and you don't like data that upsets you
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
Oh FFS.
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
And now you're abusive, to a commenter, at 1.38pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
If you can't tell the difference between exasperation and abuse, then I seriously fear for your next cognitive test.
This faux victimhood schtick really doesn't suit you.
It's not like Pope Leon, the Bishop of Tupsley, has never used profanity on this board.
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clearly Samaritans are a very good thing whose shoestrings seem to be snapping.
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
The Chief Executive did a similar thing when she ran Childline, she's like a plague of locusts. If the problem is that they need more volunteers, the solution isn't going to be closing half the branches and ask people to take calls from suicidal people (and mischief makers) from home. It's a competency issue.
There seems to be a plague of such people in the Charitable/Third Sector. They are incompetent managers to a staggering degree, moving around, collapsing organisations. A common factor is their belief in "professionalisation" - by which they mean lots of reports to/for/at/or/near/by/with/or/from senior managers, as well as hiring in expensive outside agencies. To generate more reports.
The actual operation of the organisation can go hang, as far as they are concerned.
Such people also have a rabid dislike and fear of volunteerism.
The third sector is purely there for people to make salaries they couldn't get actually doing work. Volunteers who believe in the mission are a problem because they may realise the mission isn't the point and raise it
Clarkson was right. Unless it's for work or a spectacular pay rise, emigration just turns you into somebody who constantly moans.
"The primary purpose of the British constabulary is to suppress the unruly passions of a native population it holds in contempt."
Does Clarkson ever get tired of talking bollocks?
Our police (and I am closely related to, and acquainted with, a few) are actually remarkably respectful of, and friendly to, the population in general as long as you're not a criminal. There are plenty of countries in the world where the police are contemptuous of, or actively hostile to, the masses, but this isn't one of them.
The issue isn't the attitude of the police, it's that they have to follow the rulings of an arrogant, cynical and incompetent political class, of which our Prime Minister and his cronies are the stereotypical example, who really do want to suppress a population, or parts of it anyway, they hold in contempt.
What a load of impartial forelock tugging bullshit.
But I guess your perspective of plod depends on where you are in society and where you are geographically
The police sorry to say often derive their attitudes from their perception of you. You might find them remarkably respectful and friendly, others of us not so much. For example my record in my mid twenties was being stopped, searched and questioned 23 times in a single year. Frankly I don't find the crime of walking down the road from the shop with a 4 pint bottle of milk in my hand a respectful or friendly attitude. I am guessing my crime was probably having waist length hair and a leather jacket because none of the times I was stopped was I doing anything suspicious.
IMHO, having waist length hair is more than sufficient reason for the police to be taking an interest in you.
Is there some study that have proved a correlation between hair length and criminality that I am unaware of?
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
Many years ago, a friend was knocked down in a hit and run, on his way home from working a shift in a pub.
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
Best one I had was arrested, thrown ungently into a van and spent 12 hours in a cell....my crime they found a spray can in my pocket. When the duty solicitor finally turned up (never speak to the police as recommended by serving officers such as night jack) got resolved in 10 minutes when the solicitor pointed out the spray can wasn't paint but hairspray
Why does @Malmesbury have so many "friends" who have been arrested?
Was he the copper?
In my long-haired student period I was wandering down the road at 2am when Thames Valley's finest pounced and invited me for a ride in their panda car. Apparently they were looking for someone last seen breaking into a butcher's shop. "Wouldn't have been me," I trilled, "I'm a vegetarian". The copper stared at me as if I was a complete and utter imbecile. "They weren't looking for meat," he said.
During the lockdown I went for a countryside walk because that was what we were being encouraged to do. While I was walking along a road a police car came along and decided to stop and ask me what I was doing in a very unfriendly way. Irritating and unnecessary. They did it just because I was the only person walking in that area.
England settling in for the hard grind bit of the innings. I hope they don't get becalmed, though; that tends to lead to wickets.
Still averaging 4.5 an over. For the first time I can recall in this excellent series this is not looking particularly competitive. India really needing to do some thinking at lunch and come up with some new ideas.
"The Samaritans are planning to close more than 100 branches across the UK and Ireland, the BBC has learned.
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
Clearly Samaritans are a very good thing whose shoestrings seem to be snapping.
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
The Chief Executive did a similar thing when she ran Childline, she's like a plague of locusts. If the problem is that they need more volunteers, the solution isn't going to be closing half the branches and ask people to take calls from suicidal people (and mischief makers) from home. It's a competency issue.
There seems to be a plague of such people in the Charitable/Third Sector. They are incompetent managers to a staggering degree, moving around, collapsing organisations. A common factor is their belief in "professionalisation" - by which they mean lots of reports to/for/at/or/near/by/with/or/from senior managers, as well as hiring in expensive outside agencies. To generate more reports.
The actual operation of the organisation can go hang, as far as they are concerned.
Such people also have a rabid dislike and fear of volunteerism.
Amen to that.
"Professionalisation" is due to the attachment of Service Level Agreements (SLA) from funding bodies. More often than not, the funding is government derived from various pots channelled though various super organisations. Many quite capable volunteers object to having a Capability Matrix used to question their abilities and sometimes a role comes with the need for CPD too. Continuous Professional Development is costly so organisations may not wish to spend it on those at the end of their careers.
Comments
The thing is I got to know the police in slough pretty well as they kept pulling me over and most of them would quite happily admit the pubs that there was usually trouble at weren't the ones full of bikers, punks and goths but the ones the trendy folk went too, where there was a dress code etc. They just didn't seem to realise the cognitive dissonance between assuming we were trouble compared to the places they had to monitor waiting for the kick off on a saturday night
“Islamophobia isn’t just socially acceptable in the UK now – it’s flourishing. How did this happen???”
Yes indeed. How could such a thing happen? As I look at British history these past 39 years it’s like this came out of nowhere, absolutely nowhere. I cannot think of a single reason why this has happened. I’m stumped
In a presentation to staff, the suicide prevention charity's chief executive said "at least half" of their branches will close.
Dozens of branches have voiced concerns, some fearing the proposals will lead to an exodus of volunteers: "They're dismantling something that has worked for 70 years," said one volunteer.
The Samaritans said having more than 200 branches "is not sustainable and hinders us" from providing the best service."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2l23ylv46o
The ideology is that you need to deliver the Far, Far, Far Right government so that the whole system collapses and everyone joins in the Pure Socialist Revolution.
The fact that every time this has been tried, it has ended up with a vast past of death people and completely failed is down to the Purity of the Revolution not being pure enough.
It's all about the Purity of vital essence. You see, it really was a Commie plot.....
- "a rogue poll" is one where you disagree with a BPC valid poll.
- "A pollster who should be investigated/banned" is one who regularly produces BPC valid polls that you don't like.
I'm quite interested in context. Leon's "“More than half of the public think Islam is not compatible with British values, according to a survey." is one data point - and that is fine.
But there's a "views about Muslims" tracker on the Yougov site, which uses a vocabulary of whether Muslim values 'clash' with British values, which suggests that the number for the 'clash' question was down from 55% yes to 45% yes between 2015 and 2019, when the series stopped.
So background and nuance is needed.
(My position is we need to see evolution of Islam to a state "where everyone else can live comfortably with it." My telltale is Muslim countries discontinuing to use the death penalty within a notionally Sharia system, of which there are several. People tend to miss that Sharia is very like British Common Law - a tradition which evolves. In 1400 British Common Law was disembowelling people and in 1600 was putting their heads on spikes.)
'Actually pretty devastating findings. Worse as you drill down'
Would a 'lock the Muzzies up' white nationalist type be devastated by these findings or feel gratified & validated by them?
A policeman found him lying in the gutter, gave him a shoeing and arrested him. While semi-conscious.
When asked, the policeman replied (I paraphrase, but the sentiment is right) "He was a long haired drunk* bastard and deserved it."
*Smelled of beer, but a blood test at the hospital, on admission showed next to no alcohol.
There was a very interesting reading room provided by Ahmadis just off the campus of Bradford University when I was there in the mid-1980s. It was one of the things that started me trying to understand Islam in the UK. There was also a chap called iirc Philip Davis working for the Bishop of Bradford who used to run interesting study days to help British people understand the Muslim Community.
Was he the copper?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx202grvk29o
But then it is difficult to pin down British values. There are very different views as to what those are.
So, the question of whether there is a clash between two things, both of which are diverse and contested, is impossible to answer simply. That said, the poll is still interesting to tell us what people's views are.
It would be interesting to poll the question in a different way. Ask, "Do you know someone who is Muslim? Do their views clash with British values?"
Oh, it would also be interesting to poll people in what do they think Muslim values are.
Finding a place for Conservatism which ignores platitudinous fact free distinctions of left and right, and starts to think what might be a model for society once the 1945 - the present day social democrat consensus has run its course would be useful.
(The only remotely serious non social-democrats in visible politics are Corbyn style genuinely socialist and properly libertarian movements).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5hdk5HqSqE
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law
Back to the central mystery- why could our grandparents' society afford this and we apparently can't?
As a student, I was helping run the student union. Which meant helping students out of trouble, very often. It was harder to say which was more prevalent - students getting arrested or students getting pregnant.
EDIT: The Saffa Student Hall of Residence warden who got lifted due to a misunderstanding about grow lamps and biltong was someone I knew off, wouldn't say a friend.
I'll leave that floating; lunch is calling.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/cricket/market/1.245650383
The trillion days have been punctuated by several, both short and lengthier early baths, and a not insubstantial number of regenerations.
Islam is not compatible with modern British values.
Christianity isn't either. That's the bit he omits to mention.
Most people try to square those circles by blanking out significant proportions of religion as something they pretend isn't relevant. Unless it suits their agenda, in which case its very relevant.
https://youtu.be/S1-ip47WYWc?si=bSWxY3vXkauo6pHE
You’re basically left with three wishy washy status quo parties of around 10-15% each. The Centrist Dad party. Logically they should merge and consolidate their agenda for an ever growing client welfare state, paid for by easy borders and at the cost of managed gradual decline.
Or perhaps Starmer will gamble and kill off FPTP before the next election, with the aim of them all entering a grand coalition to keep out Nasty Nigel.
https://www.betfair.com/betting/cricket/test-matches/england-v-india/e-34516084
Plus he still owes me a gold sovereign for a bet he welched on.
What we are wanting to avoid is your pissed up rants such as taxpayers given money to have white babies.
Of all the places where people can post their views online surely this is THE best place to discuss the subject where we will be exposed to a range of views on the subject and can make our own, I hope vaguely intelligent, minds up based on argument and facts - if we can’t discuss and debate such an important subject on here then it’s a bit sad and somewhat concerning.
We discuss very contentious issues daily such as Gaza/Israel, the environment, tax, sex/gender, assisted dying and I think it’s every bit as valid to discuss Islam in the UK, whether one is pro, ambivalent or anti because we get to see a microcosm of what the electorate might think and so can view various potential political events and issues with a greater insight.
During Covid it was useful hearing from anti-vaxxers as it was a section of the voting public, we have Ukraine sceptic/Russia curious posters, and we have people with terrible taste in footwear but it’s good they post so we know what people think whether we like their views or not.
I understand and appreciate this is a private site and can make its own rules but the absolute beauty of it has been the range of views and the ability to debate difficult issues.
Wings is always moaning that the SNP is full on trans activist so either something has changed or he's wrong (fair to say he doesnt tend to give the SNP benefit of the doubt).
Fair enough. Wr get it. Your site
But before the last of us on this side are banned, have a look at the user figures for Bluesky
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
Whereas you specifically told us not to be abusive. as that is a banning offense
The standard, everyday values of even 1950s Britain would be unacceptable today.
The standard, everyday values of 610 Britain?
If someone showed up with the behaviour and values of the Catholic Church circa 1450... they would be a proscribed group before afternoon tea.
Trust me, If I was allowed, you'd know it
When it was first published in 1991, Issues [in Human Sexuality] aimed to be sensitive, but the tone, language, and some of the assumptions are now considered inappropriate and offensive to many people.
https://www.churchofengland.org/media/press-releases/bishops-confirm-replacement-issues-human-sexuality-discernment-process
But @TSE apeears to say it's OK, so it's OK!
It is futile to ignore this, and we are importing it
This faux victimhood schtick really doesn't suit you.
The actual operation of the organisation can go hang, as far as they are concerned.
Such people also have a rabid dislike and fear of volunteerism.
What such an exaggerated policy response looks like in this case, I will leave you all to ponder. But anyone on the “yes” side of that polling question would do well to carefully consider how best to close the opinion gap before there is such an exaggerated policy reaction. Suppressing comment and debate doesn’t feel like the optimal way of going about it but what do I know.
Not abusive
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm
Abusive
READ MY FUCKING POST at 1.34pm YOU STUPID FUCKING TWAT
Leondamus, ditto.
We are heading for a reckoning unless there is a major course correction, very very very quickly
If Ms Reeves wanted to hit big business, she could have set the starting limit at £5 mill or £10 mill, there won't be many corporate investors under that value. Its about drawing money out for the treasury, but even then its poorly designed
Land for solar/renewables is generally rented, which means if the backside falls out of that industry, or the company wishes to vacate, they can do easily as it'll be written into the terms of their lease. And if they wish to transfer the lease to another company, that's no problem as companies don't pay IHT
Konstantin Kisin on Russia, Iran and the rise of right-wing identity politics."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/07/24/the-delusions-of-the-online-right
"Professionalisation" is due to the attachment of Service Level Agreements (SLA) from funding bodies. More often than not, the funding is government derived from various pots channelled though various super organisations. Many quite capable volunteers object to having a Capability Matrix used to question their abilities and sometimes a role comes with the need for CPD too. Continuous Professional Development is costly so organisations may not wish to spend it on those at the end of their careers.
Process State in all its glories.