I posted last night- I think young Muslims have a real problem with modernity. Aside from smoking weed, playing computer games, listening to gangster rap, they have little external vent for their feelings. The family, culture and community is controlling, stifling and oppressive. They can't drink, they don't do piercing and tats, they don't do class A's; they don't do anything that visibly ostracises them. They are reminded all the time about family, duty, obligation.
And so they turn to radical Islam- a way to rebel, and to exert their individualism within the constraints of a controlled life.
They outwardly vent their frustrations onto causes- Syria, Palestine, Iraq etc... In reality their families are the problem, their controlling parents, their communities- they are the ones that drive their kids into this nihilistic nonsense.
I agree. The cognitive dissonance caused by the challenge to beliefs from moving to the West can cause all sorts of reactions. It is a common theme of radical Islamists that they became more fanatical through exposure to the transparent material, social and political superiority of Western culture. If they have been always taught that Islam is superior when it is manifestly not so, there can be an unpredictable response.
Indeed Wahabism itself began in the 18th century as a revival of early practices and dismay of the corruption and effeteness of the Ottoman Caliphate of the time.
In terms of Muslims in this country, I think it's a mistake to think these young people aren't 'integrated'. They spend all their time on their mobiles like all young people, play Call of Duty etc. They don't drink so they get stoned instead. They don't eat non-halal but that's not particular 'different' these days. I read an article on VICE where ISIS recruits over in Syria were getting care packages of designer boxers and Cadbury's chocolate from their mums. I think the problem is there's no strong sense of purpose, no sense of mission, no sense of meaning in modern British life. They get that from radical Islam.
I posted last night- I think young Muslims have a real problem with modernity. Aside from smoking weed, playing computer games, listening to gangster rap, they have little external vent for their feelings. The family, culture and community is controlling, stifling and oppressive. They can't drink, they don't do piercing and tats, they don't do class A's; they don't do anything that visibly ostracises them. They are reminded all the time about family, duty, obligation.
And so they turn to radical Islam- a way to rebel, and to exert their individualism within the constraints of a controlled life.
They outwardly vent their frustrations onto causes- Syria, Palestine, Iraq etc... In reality their families are the problem, their controlling parents, their communities- they are the ones that drive their kids into this nihilistic nonsense.
In terms of Muslims in this country, I think it's a mistake to think these young people aren't 'integrated'. They spend all their time on their mobiles like all young people, play Call of Duty etc. They don't drink so they get stoned instead. They don't eat non-halal but that's not particular 'different' these days. I read an article on VICE where ISIS recruits over in Syria were getting care packages of designer boxers and Cadbury's chocolate from their mums. I think the problem is there's no strong sense of purpose, no sense of mission, no sense of meaning in modern British life. They get that from radical Islam.
Doesn't what you say also apply to young Indians or young Jews or young Chinese? Part of the issue may be the lack of any sort of normal contact with women, the main thing young men are interested in.
But I think one key issue is what Dr Fox has described i.e. the difference between what you are told about Islam being superior, having a glorious past etc and the reality of the Muslim world now and the position of Muslims within the Western world. Hussey describes well how humiliating the effect of colonialism has been on the French North African states and how the young there both long to get to France and despise it and that this duality is also seen within the North African communities within France. That may be a specific French issue, of course
But the difference between reality and what you believe you ought to be can drive some to try and bridge that gap in disastrously violent ways, particularly if there is some preacher telling you that this gap is all the fault of others (the West, America, Jews, etc etc). If you feel a failure much easier to believe that it is down to the malice / actions of others than to embark on the necessary critical self-reflection, particularly if the milieu you're in doesn't particularly encourage the latter.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Her problem is that she's quite dull and struggles to answer questions straight: it makes her sound evasive.
However, that's not necessarily fatal. She has balls of steel and is a survivor. Of all the Tory frontrunners for the leadership atm she's probably the best of the bunch.
There are so many jokes could be made about that!
However, on the substantive point it would be very surprising if she were the next Tory leader. She's Home Secretary - the last Home Secretary to become PM directly was Palmerston in 1855, under very unusual circumstances. Asquith and then of all people William Joynson-Hicks are the two who come nearest after that (Asquith would have been LOTO and then PM with no Campbell-Bannerman could he have afforded to give up his practice as a barrister). But more than that, she is too divisive. She tends to repel as many people as she attracts - what some see as good old-fashioned straight-talking, others see as straight bigotry. In office, the Conservatives are more likely to look for a conciliator. The same problem tells against George Osborne and to a lesser extent Boris Johnson.
Hammond should probably be betting favourite at the moment, especially if he is in the Cabin(make a hole in each end...) We don't know the answer to either of those yet, so I would say there isn't much actual value in any contender right now.
I don't think labelling Theresa May bigoted is a credible attack line. She was one of the earliest modernisers.
I think the point about Home Secretary is a classic correlation does not equal causation canard.
I think there are some interesting longshots (beneath the radar at the moment) but I disagree that she isn't value.
"We are the NASTY PARTY" - Theresa May
She didn't actually say that .......but you already knew that.
She did not say or claim the tories were the nasty party. So stop making an even bigger fool of yourself than usual. As for May, I do not think she is likely to run as leader, or win if she did.
She claimed others called the Tories "nasty":
"You know what some people call us: the nasty party." - Theresa May, October 2002.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
A question for the PB brains trust. A friend of mine's dad has recently got interested in the middle east (Sunni, Shia and IS etc) and all that is going on. Can any PBers recommend a couple of decent books that cover the background and the various factions etc?
I have a small business, I'll take money from anybody. If we are in a society where the police arrest people for choosing their customers via social media I despair.
Thames Valley Police detained the woman after the posting - made following the Paris terrorist attacks - said that people from the "Islamic faith" were no longer welcome at the Blinks of Bicester spa and beauty salon. The Facebook postings read: "Blinks of Bicester are no longer taking bookings from anyone from the Islamic faith whether you are UK granted with passport or not" and "Sorry but time to put my country first".
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
Assuming it's true - and quite apart from the stupidity - what criminal offence are they arresting her for?
It's not even that offensive. There must have been at least a million, maybe 10 million, more offensive comments posted online during the last 48 hours. What are the police going to do, arrest the internet?
I really don't know why Antifrank is pretending to be an undecided, perhaps it's because he wants to keep writing undecided articles on here. Just man up and say I want us to stay in the EU regardless, it's not a crime or a sin.
I'd have hoped the one advantage of writing at excessive length would have been to make my views clear as to how I'll approach my decision-making. If Leave is going to campaign on pulling up the drawbridge, I'll probably be voting Remain. If it makes a positive case for Britain becoming a confident internationalist welcoming country, I'll probably be voting Leave.
I accept that my vote may well, as per the article, be one that Leave feels it is appropriate to sacrifice in pursuit of a majority.
You write very well, my compliments (that sounds patronising but it's not my intention).
The ever impartial Nick Palmer agrees with what you've written, which essentially is that LEAVE are relying on immigration issues. It's the left/labour line, to label anybody that wishes to control population numbers as the bad man.
The price on betfair for you to vote IN is 1.01, just be honest and stop this ridiculous undecided charade.
If the mass migration is perceived as a threat, and that threat impacts on the referendum, it is possible that it will strengthen the Remain vote, as opposed to the Leave vote.
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
While on most issues Labour is now irrelevant , it remains a potentially disruptive force for the UK’s development of a meaningful and ethical response to the threat from IS.
The Conservative Government understands these points but with only a small majority in the House of Commons there is a chance that the foreign policy fantasists, who currently run Labour and the SNP, could tie the British army’s hands.
However, there is one piece of internal organising that is now far more pressing for the country as a whole rather than the Party alone. This is for those in Labour who take our international defence commitments seriously to join together to ensure that the Party (or enough of it) gives its backing to the world’s efforts to defeat IS.
Rubbish, it is a failure of Cameron and Osborne to convince Tories to vote with the government. Many of whom are unconvinced by the need to remove Assad, which Cameron seems fixated on. The penalty of being a broad church is that there will always be a few thick tory backbenchers. Unfortunately in the low circles I normally travel I am unlikely to be able to meet them. Its a pity because I would tell them to their faces in no uncertain manner what I think of them. The need in places like Syria is for democracy. For people to be able to overthrow their government in peace and then in turn for that government to be replaced according to democratic process.
Thames Valley Police detained the woman after the posting - made following the Paris terrorist attacks - said that people from the "Islamic faith" were no longer welcome at the Blinks of Bicester spa and beauty salon. The Facebook postings read: "Blinks of Bicester are no longer taking bookings from anyone from the Islamic faith whether you are UK granted with passport or not" and "Sorry but time to put my country first".
The council area that Bicester is in is Cherwell, which I recently discovered is pronounced "Charwell". So it's Bister in Charwell not Bicester in Cherwell.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
Assuming it's true - and quite apart from the stupidity - what criminal offence are they arresting her for?
Section 19 of the Public Order Act so probably inciting racial hatred/malicious communications at a stretch
Thanks. I don't even see a prima facie case here given that she's talking about banning people on religious grounds not racial ones. Not my area of expertise. And I think she's daft to do it. But being daft and stupid is, thank God, not yet a criminal offence.
Her problem is that she's quite dull and struggles to answer questions straight: it makes her sound evasive.
However, that's not necessarily fatal. She has balls of steel and is a survivor. Of all the Tory frontrunners for the leadership atm she's probably the best of the bunch.
There are so many jokes could be made about that!
However, on the substantive point it would be very surprising if she were the next Tory leader. She's Home Secretary - the last Home Secretary to become PM directly was Palmerston in 1855, under very unusual circumstances. Asquith and then of all people William Joynson-Hicks are the two who come nearest after that (Asquith would have been LOTO and then PM with no Campbell-Bannerman could he have afforded to give up his practice as a barrister). But more than that, she is too divisive. She tends to repel as many people as she attracts - what some see as good old-fashioned straight-talking, others see as straight bigotry. In office, the Conservatives are more likely to look for a conciliator. The same problem tells against George Osborne and to a lesser extent Boris Johnson.
Hammond should probably be betting favourite at the moment, especially if he is in the Cabin(make a hole in each end...) We don't know the answer to either of those yet, so I would say there isn't much actual value in any contender right now.
I don't think labelling Theresa May bigoted is a credible attack line. She was one of the earliest modernisers.
I think the point about Home Secretary is a classic correlation does not equal causation canard.
I think there are some interesting longshots (beneath the radar at the moment) but I disagree that she isn't value.
"We are the NASTY PARTY" - Theresa May
She didn't actually say that .......but you already knew that.
She did not say or claim the tories were the nasty party. So stop making an even bigger fool of yourself than usual. As for May, I do not think she is likely to run as leader, or win if she did.
She claimed others called the Tories "nasty":
"You know what some people call us: the nasty party." - Theresa May, October 2002.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
Former French President Nicola Sarkozy has told French TV that all those on an official watchlist of suspected radicals should be forced to wear "an electronic tag". He is widely expected to run for the presidency again in 2017.
And he will win.
Sarkozy will swing as Right as he needs to do to beat Le Pen.
Personally I think Manuel Valls could get it
Valls would be beaten by Juppe, Sarkozy or Le Pen in a run off. The left are very, very unpopular in France and the terrorist attack in Paris will push people further away from the appeasement policies of the left.
Most polling shows Valls and Sarkozy effectively tied in a run-off and Valls is far more dynamic and charismatic than Hollande and also willing to take a tough line when needed. Given Le Pen is almost certain to top the first round only one of Valls or Sarkozy will face her, if say the centre right split the vote between Sarkozy and Juppe or Fillon in Round 1 and Hollande withdraws in favour of Valls, Valls could well end up facing Le Pen in the run-off, latest polling shows he has a clear lead over her in Round 2, 55% to 45% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017
All of those polls were carried out before the migrant crisis and of course before the Paris terrorist attack. They are as useful as a chocolate teapot.
You are ignoring the fact Valls can himself be quite tough on migrants when he wants to, including creating 900 extra border security police and reinstating border controls with Italy. The Paris attacks are likely to boost Le Pen further in round 1, but if Valls beats a divided centre right to face her in round two he would still be slight favourite
I'm not ignoring anything, it's just that the left in France will not be able to out fight the right on immigration and anti-terror. If, as it seems, the next few elections in Europe are going to e fought on these subjects the left will struggle across the whole of the continent outside of the bail out nations.
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
I really don't know why Antifrank is pretending to be an undecided, perhaps it's because he wants to keep writing undecided articles on here. Just man up and say I want us to stay in the EU regardless, it's not a crime or a sin.
I'd have hoped the one advantage of writing at excessive length would have been to make my views clear as to how I'll approach my decision-making. If Leave is going to campaign on pulling up the drawbridge, I'll probably be voting Remain. If it makes a positive case for Britain becoming a confident internationalist welcoming country, I'll probably be voting Leave.
I accept that my vote may well, as per the article, be one that Leave feels it is appropriate to sacrifice in pursuit of a majority.
You write very well, my compliments (that sounds patronising but it's not my intention).
The ever impartial Nick Palmer agrees with what you've written, which essentially is that LEAVE are relying on immigration issues. It's the left/labour line, to label anybody that wishes to control population numbers as the bad man.
The price on betfair for you to vote IN is 1.01, just be honest and stop this ridiculous undecided charade.
If the mass migration is perceived as a threat, and that threat impacts on the referendum, it is possible that it will strengthen the Remain vote, as opposed to the Leave vote.
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
Agree. People may feel that working together is important at a time when they feel under threat, particularly when that threat is to all.
Some crying on my facebook about the bombs in Raqqa.
France is at war, IS has declared war on it with these actions. It is a clearer case even than Afghanistan, the clearest case since 1939 even. It must be wiped out utterly and we must support our NATO ally France however she wishes.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
A question for the PB brains trust. A friend of mine's dad has recently got interested in the middle east (Sunni, Shia and IS etc) and all that is going on. Can any PBers recommend a couple of decent books that cover the background and the various factions etc?
The Old Testament?
You don't really know too much about Islam do you. Unless you consider popping up to heaven to negotiate with God and having a quick chat with Moses and then coming down again is not supernatural and is in fact plausible.
Useless fact; tens of thousands of Chinese tourists visit Bicester Village shopping outlet every year. It's their number two tourist attraction in the UK after Buckingham Palace apparently.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
I don't know. That's why I was asking.
It's not my area of expertise, but I remember Rowan Atkinson being very upset at the provisions in it. Said it would make comedy and satire criminal
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
I don't know. That's why I was asking.
It's not my area of expertise, by I remember Rowan Atkinson being very upset at the provisions in it. Said it would comedy and satire criminal
See my post below. Only for intentional religious hatred.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
I thought that was successfully fought and thrown out after a campaign by a whole range of people including comedians who made the (to me) obvious point that religion is a choice where race is not.
Her problem is that she's quite dull and struggles to answer questions straight: it makes her sound evasive.
However, that's not necessarily fatal. She has balls of steel and is a survivor. Of all the Tory frontrunners for the leadership atm she's probably the best of the bunch.
There are so many jokes could be made about that!
snip
Hammond should probably be betting favourite at the moment, especially if he is in the Cabin(make a hole in each end...) We don't know the answer to either of those yet, so I would say there isn't much actual value in any contender right now.
I don't think labelling Theresa May bigoted is a credible attack line. She was one of the earliest modernisers.
I think the point about Home Secretary is a classic correlation does not equal causation canard.
I think there are some interesting longshots (beneath the radar at the moment) but I disagree that she isn't value.
"We are the NASTY PARTY" - Theresa May
She didn't actually say that .......but you already knew that.
She did not say or claim the tories were the nasty party. So stop making an even bigger fool of yourself than usual. As for May, I do not think she is likely to run as leader, or win if she did.
She claimed others called the Tories "nasty":
"You know what some people call us: the nasty party." - Theresa May, October 2002.
Its perhaps best to tell him then, but on re-reading I can see your point. As for Mr Surbiton - where ever you are - I am not surprised he fails at english comprehension, but I for one grow tired of repetitive misrepresentation of Mays remarks. I repeat as well, I do not think she would actually stand or win or make the best next leader.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
I don't know. That's why I was asking.
It's not my area of expertise, but I remember Rowan Atkinson being very upset at the provisions in it. Said it would comedy and satire criminal
It's total rubbish. There is no chance of a successful prosecution. This is a "mind your language" piece of intimidation. There is absolutely no way this comes even close to the incitement to hatred provisions. Not even in the same galaxy, never mind same orbit.
There are other pieces of legislation in regards to provision of services that she could be prosecuted under, though not by the police.
As long as she does not admit, this is going nowhere.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
Wasn't the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act effectively amended the Public order act I believe on the grounds of religion too
I thought that was successfully fought and thrown out after a campaign by a whole range of people including comedians who made the (to me) obvious point that religion is a choice where race is not.
It was, but as Mr Rabbit says below it only applies when there is intentional religious hatred.
Daily Mirror @DailyMirror 1h1 hour ago A woman has been arrested after Facebook posts 'banning Muslims from her salon'
I really hope that's tabloid hyperbole
A woman has been arrested after allegedly making Facebook posts saying she would no longer take bookings from Muslims in the wake of the Paris terror attacks.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
That section says this -
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
religious hatred has no such "likely to be stirred up thereby" i.e. recklessness limb. intent only.
Thanks.
It's a strange mess we've got into when people holding up banners in London saying "Behead those who insult Islam" - a very specific incitement to violence, even carefully spelling out the type of violence to be incited - is not caught by that provision but someone saying that she won't take haircut bookings at a salon from Muslims is or might be caught.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
Its still all just a bunch of Middle Eastern Sky Fairies whichever branch you chose to follow.
Hopefully the next prophet will keep his mouth shut and let us all get on with our lives in peace.
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
It's pretty clear that the centre right is comfortable with voting for MLP in a run off between MLP and a left candidate, she would beat Valls and definitely beat Hollande. If it is between MLP and a left candidate then it I think MLP becomes POTFR, if it is between Sarkozy and Valls then Sarkozy wins.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
I really don't know why Antifrank is pretending to be an undecided, perhaps it's because he wants to keep writing undecided articles on here. Just man up and say I want us to stay in the EU regardless, it's not a crime or a sin.
I'd have hoped the one advantage of writing at excessive length would have been to make my views clear as to how I'll approach my decision-making. If Leave is going to campaign on pulling up the drawbridge, I'll probably be voting Remain. If it makes a positive case for Britain becoming a confident internationalist welcoming country, I'll probably be voting Leave.
I accept that my vote may well, as per the article, be one that Leave feels it is appropriate to sacrifice in pursuit of a majority.
You write very well, my compliments (that sounds patronising but it's not my intention).
The ever impartial Nick Palmer agrees with what you've written, which essentially is that LEAVE are relying on immigration issues. It's the left/labour line, to label anybody that wishes to control population numbers as the bad man.
The price on betfair for you to vote IN is 1.01, just be honest and stop this ridiculous undecided charade.
If the mass migration is perceived as a threat, and that threat impacts on the referendum, it is possible that it will strengthen the Remain vote, as opposed to the Leave vote.
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
What I never get with these stories, if you are a bigoted racist Islamophobe running a business that deals face to face with the public there are many ways of not accepting certain people's business without making such a post of Facebook / Twitter.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
Its still all just a bunch of Middle Eastern Sky Fairies whichever branch you chose to follow.
Hopefully the next prophet will keep his mouth shut and let us all get on with our lives in peace.
The only prophets needed are dead ones. If I need fantasy, Morris Dancers books are a good start.
I really don't know why Antifrank is pretending to be an undecided, perhaps it's because he wants to keep writing undecided articles on here. Just man up and say I want us to stay in the EU regardless, it's not a crime or a sin.
I'd have hoped the one advantage of writing at excessive length would have been to make my views clear as to how I'll approach my decision-making. If Leave is going to campaign on pulling up the drawbridge, I'll probably be voting Remain. If it makes a positive case for Britain becoming a confident internationalist welcoming country, I'll probably be voting Leave.
I accept that my vote may well, as per the article, be one that Leave feels it is appropriate to sacrifice in pursuit of a majority.
You write very well, my compliments (that sounds patronising but it's not my intention).
The ever impartial Nick Palmer agrees with what you've written, which essentially is that LEAVE are relying on immigration issues. It's the left/labour line, to label anybody that wishes to control population numbers as the bad man.
The price on betfair for you to vote IN is 1.01, just be honest and stop this ridiculous undecided charade.
If the mass migration is perceived as a threat, and that threat impacts on the referendum, it is possible that it will strengthen the Remain vote, as opposed to the Leave vote.
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
Its still all just a bunch of Middle Eastern Sky Fairies whichever branch you chose to follow.
Hopefully the next prophet will keep his mouth shut and let us all get on with our lives in peace.
By the way, the French attacks are reportedly only a starting point. My understanding is that they plan to flatten large parts of Raqqa and other areas.
If the intelligence is good, it does cause IS issues because is a lot harder doing things when someone is bombing you heavily every night and not much you can do about it. It still doesn't deal with the problem cases closer to home though.
What I never get with these stories, if you are a bigoted racist Islamophobe running a business that deals face to face with the public there are many ways of not accepting certain people's business without making such a post of Facebook / Twitter.
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
That is always trotted out but is it actually true? When my next door neighbour was burgled the police did not investigate, and when my mate in Ditchling rang them up and told them that the opposite his was being burgled as he spoke the police said they were too busy to take any action. I could go on and give numerous other examples of the police not investigating when a complaint was made.
Yet somehow for some types of complaint, especially when the alleged offender is know and not the sort of person who might cause them a problem th police find that they always have the resources and always trot out the line, "we must investigate when a complaint is made".
As a fine point of interest, and one that you as a lawyer should appreciate, the police clearly knew where to find this woman and she was hardly likely to abscond, so why was an arrest necessary? If the arrest wasn't necessary it is surely illegal.
By the way, the French attacks are reportedly only a starting point. My understanding is that they plan to flatten large parts of Raqqa and other areas.
If the intelligence is good, it does cause IS issues because is a lot harder doing things when someone is bombing you heavily every night and not much you can do about it. It still doesn't deal with the problem cases closer to home though.
Sam Kiley was saying the opposite on Sky News earlier. He was claiming that basically they asked to do all the bombing runs for the next few days of pre-existing targets that were going to get lit up anyway.
Thames Valley Police detained the woman after the posting - made following the Paris terrorist attacks - said that people from the "Islamic faith" were no longer welcome at the Blinks of Bicester spa and beauty salon. The Facebook postings read: "Blinks of Bicester are no longer taking bookings from anyone from the Islamic faith whether you are UK granted with passport or not" and "Sorry but time to put my country first".
Jeez. There's always one.
Why shouldn't she? She has the right to select her customers.
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
They did not investigate when a disabled man rang the police station to complain he was being threatened because he was a suspected paedophile (he was innocent as I understand it). The police ignored it and he was later murdered, beaten and burned to death.. The police woman who ignored his complaint in now being prosecuted herself.
The stop the war loonies posted something nasty and took it down later. Why were they not prosecuted? Can the police not just issue some sort of caution? Why arrest some stupid silly person for this?
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
That is always trotted out but is it actually true? When my next door neighbour was burgled the police did not investigate, and when my mate in Ditchling rang them up and told them that the opposite his was being burgled as he spoke the police said they were too busy to take any action. I could go on and give numerous other examples of the police not investigating when a complaint was made.
Yet somehow for some types of complaint, especially when the alleged offender is know and not the sort of person who might cause them a problem th police find that they always have the resources and always trot out the line, "we must investigate when a complaint is made".
As a fine point of interest, and one that you as a lawyer should appreciate, the police clearly knew where to find this woman and she was hardly likely to abscond, so why was an arrest necessary? If the arrest wasn't necessary it is surely illegal.
I recall in a similar case the police justified the arrest on the grounds to stop the accused of deleting/erasing further evidence, looks like here she had deleted her posts.
By the way, the French attacks are reportedly only a starting point. My understanding is that they plan to flatten large parts of Raqqa and other areas.
If the intelligence is good, it does cause IS issues because is a lot harder doing things when someone is bombing you heavily every night and not much you can do about it. It still doesn't deal with the problem cases closer to home though.
Sam Kiley was saying the opposite on Sky News earlier. He was claiming that basically they asked to do all the bombing runs for the next few days of pre-existing targets that were going to get lit up anyway.
If you look at the rate of attacks on Raqqa, they do 3-4 days at this tempo and it will be a month of what happened previously. Thats a big uplift.
Her problem is that she's quite dull and struggles to answer questions straight: it makes her sound evasive.
However, that's not necessarily fatal. She has balls of steel and is a survivor. Of all the Tory frontrunners for the leadership atm she's probably the best of the bunch.
There are so many jokes could be made about that!
However, on the substantive point it would be very surprising if she were the next Tory leader. She's Home Secretary - the last Home Secretary to become PM directly was Palmerston in 1855, under very unusual circumstances. Asquith and then of all people William Joynson-Hicks are the two who come nearest after that (Asquith would have been LOTO and then PM with no Campbell-Bannerman could he have afforded to give up his practice as a barrister). But more than that, she is too divisive. She tends to repel as many people as she attracts - what some see as good old-fashioned straight-talking, others see as straight bigotry. In office, the Conservatives are more likely to look for a conciliator. The same problem tells against George Osborne and to a lesser extent Boris Johnson.
Hammond should probably be betting favourite at the moment, especially if he is in the Cabinet and Britain votes Leave. However, my instinct is that the next Tory leader will be somebody totally unexpected and possibly currently quite junior (as in Minister of State). An awful lot will depend on when the good Mr Cameron jacks it in and whether Jeremy Corbyn is still clinging on to the Labour leadership. The referendum's result will matter, as will the state of the economy (make a hole in each end...) We don't know the answer to either of those yet, so I would say there isn't much actual value in any contender right now.
I don't think labelling Theresa May bigoted is a credible attack line. She was one of the earliest modernisers.
I think the point about Home Secretary is a classic correlation does not equal causation canard.
I think there are some interesting longshots (beneath the radar at the moment) but I disagree that she isn't value.
"We are the NASTY PARTY" - Theresa May
She didn't actually say that .......but you already knew that.
What she meant to say was We Are the Nazi Party.
What an exceptionally unpleasant and uncharacteristic comment.
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
It's pretty clear that the centre right is comfortable with voting for MLP in a run off between MLP and a left candidate, she would beat Valls and definitely beat Hollande. If it is between MLP and a left candidate then it I think MLP becomes POTFR, if it is between Sarkozy and Valls then Sarkozy wins.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
Not on the latest polling evidence where Valls beat her 55%-45%, some of the lower middle class centre right may vote for Le Pen, the upper middle class centre right would vote for Valls. If it is MLP and Hollande then MLP may win, if it is Valls v MLP then Valls will win. Le Pen will almost certainly be in the second round so your final scenario is unlikely but would be too close to call.
Valls is basically a Blairite, he could certainly beat MLP, he will win most of the middle class vote, she would win most of the working class vote, but he should win overall
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
That is always trotted out but is it actually true? When my next door neighbour was burgled the police did not investigate, and when my mate in Ditchling rang them up and told them that the opposite his was being burgled as he spoke the police said they were too busy to take any action. I could go on and give numerous other examples of the police not investigating when a complaint was made.
Yet somehow for some types of complaint, especially when the alleged offender is know and not the sort of person who might cause them a problem th police find that they always have the resources and always trot out the line, "we must investigate when a complaint is made".
As a fine point of interest, and one that you as a lawyer should appreciate, the police clearly knew where to find this woman and she was hardly likely to abscond, so why was an arrest necessary? If the arrest wasn't necessary it is surely illegal.
I recall in a similar case the police justified the arrest on the grounds to stop the accused of deleting/erasing further evidence, looks like here she had deleted her posts.
That makes no sense to me at all. If they have the evidence why do they need the posts to be kept up, surely to do so is to compound the original offence and if the posts have already been deleted, and thus they don't have the evidence, what are they doing making the arrest in the first place. A decent lawyer would take the plod to the cleaners.
Defence lawyers all over the country are allowing the police to get away with arrests that do not need to be made and are thus not only serving their clients very badly they are also depriving their clients and themselves of serious money. Going back a few years the going rate for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment was about £2000 per hour of detention.
Useless fact; tens of thousands of Chinese tourists visit Bicester Village shopping outlet every year. It's their number two tourist attraction in the UK after Buckingham Palace apparently.
Have no idea why - I went to "the Village" four years ago and saw nothing that made it any differnt from the West End or the new Westfield Malls.
So why do we pronounce Bicester as Bister and not Buy-cess-ter?
Bitter of Bicester bans muslims!!
Shall we have our next lunch meet up in Bicester?
I might get my eyebrows done. You OK waiting outside!!
Nah, I might have to meet and talk to some southern Jessies.
Racism and Homophobia in one sentence excellent.
Should be OK to meet soon Mrs BJ is having her operation in 3 weeks.
Hope everything goes well!
Thanks.
Have you ever been to a presentation by Les Nixon, Sunil.
I am going to one at Barrow Hill engine shed on Thursday.
Am told he is brilliant.
Les Nixon - Down Memory Lane
We can look forward to another first class presentation from Les as he again delves into his extensive collection of images portraying the railway scene over more than fifty years
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
I recall in a similar case the police justified the arrest on the grounds to stop the accused of deleting/erasing further evidence, looks like here she had deleted her posts.
That makes no sense to me at all. If they have the evidence why do they need the posts to be kept up, surely to do so is to compound the original offence and if the posts have already been deleted, and thus they don't have the evidence, what are they doing making the arrest in the first place. A decent lawyer would take the plod to the cleaners.
Defence lawyers all over the country are allowing the police to get away with arrests that do not need to be made and are thus not only serving their clients very badly they are also depriving their clients and themselves of serious money. Going back a few years the going rate for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment was about £2000 per hour of detention.
I think some people go for the I was hacked/fraped defence, but I'm not a techie.
Re the defence lawyers, the worst offenders are the CDS, and their advice with out of court disposals.
You'll be able to walk out of here without a stain on your character if you accept this caution....
Someone makes a complaint to the police, the police have a duty to investigate.
I recall in a similar case the police justified the arrest on the grounds to stop the accused of deleting/erasing further evidence, looks like here she had deleted her posts.
That makes no sense to me at all. If they have the evidence why do they need the posts to be kept up, surely to do so is to compound the original offence and if the posts have already been deleted, and thus they don't have the evidence, what are they doing making the arrest in the first place. A decent lawyer would take the plod to the cleaners.
Defence lawyers all over the country are allowing the police to get away with arrests that do not need to be made and are thus not only serving their clients very badly they are also depriving their clients and themselves of serious money. Going back a few years the going rate for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment was about £2000 per hour of detention.
I think some people go for the I was hacked/fraped defence, but I'm not a techie.
Re the defence lawyers, the worst offenders are the CDS, and their advice with out of court disposals.
You'll be able to walk out of here without a stain on your character if you accept this caution....
Preventing the destruction of evidence is one of the most frequently invoked reasons for an arrest. (I'd give you a reference but I'm about to go to bed!)
The police see a tweet or whatever, they want time to go back through and build their case. For example the suspect's internet history might tell us if they intended to cause racial hatred or not.
I really don't know why Antifrank is pretending to be an undecided, perhaps it's because he wants to keep writing undecided articles on here. Just man up and say I want us to stay in the EU regardless, it's not a crime or a sin.
I'd have hoped the one advantage of writing at excessive length would have been to make my views clear as to how I'll approach my decision-making. If Leave is going to campaign on pulling up the drawbridge, I'll probably be voting Remain. If it makes a positive case for Britain becoming a confident internationalist welcoming country, I'll probably be voting Leave.
I accept that my vote may well, as per the article, be one that Leave feels it is appropriate to sacrifice in pursuit of a majority.
You write very well, my compliments (that sounds patronising but it's not my intention).
The ever impartial Nick Palmer agrees with what you've written, which essentially is that LEAVE are relying on immigration issues. It's the left/labour line, to label anybody that wishes to control population numbers as the bad man.
The price on betfair for you to vote IN is 1.01, just be honest and stop this ridiculous undecided charade.
If the mass migration is perceived as a threat, and that threat impacts on the referendum, it is possible that it will strengthen the Remain vote, as opposed to the Leave vote.
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
Could be a great card though.
People are obsessed by it.
We have more immigration from outside the EU than from within it, and we have conversely a lot of people who live in and emigrate to EU countries. Leaving the EU would not affect non EU immigration, a lot of which is students and it would affect the status of Britons living abroad.
I think some people go for the I was hacked/fraped defence, but I'm not a techie.
Re the defence lawyers, the worst offenders are the CDS, and their advice with out of court disposals.
You'll be able to walk out of here without a stain on your character if you accept this caution....
How anyone falls for the caution line I will never understand. The only proper response must be, "If you have the evidence charge me", the plod very, very seldom do have the evidence and are usually trying the caution route because they want to avoid doing the work to get it or, in not a few cases, because they have made a horrible error of judgement know they will never have sufficient evidence. In either case they are being underhand and breaking the rules but as you say they keep getting away with it, and, of course, the person still ends up with a criminal record.
Another scandal is the length of time people are kept on 38(2), or whatever they call it these days, bail. It is an abuse of process and caused solely by the plod being useless and inefficient. The law should really be changed to set a maximum period of bail to something like six weeks and to allow only one such period.
In practice this battle is most likely to end either as a no score draw (most members of the public hate thinking about economics, even though they know it’s important) or on balance the public will form a vague sense that leaving the EU would be bad for Britain’s economy. The outcome of this battleground will probably depend on completely unrelated aspects of the debate, with most members of the public backfilling their view of the economics from their conclusions elsewhere
I must say this is something I do myself, and though it's a bad thing to do, I do kind of hope I'm in the norm on that.
1. If -0.8 to +0.6 per cent is the consensus, the uncertainty will win it for REMAIN 2. Agreed that neither side is winning on this issue 3. Inherently favourable to LEAVE but as Scotland showed not enough
I think the best thing to do is to work out why Scotland voted NO and to see if the same will apply to REMAIN (I suspect it will).
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
It's pretty clear that the centre right is comfortable with voting for MLP in a run off between MLP and a left candidate, she would beat Valls and definitely beat Hollande. If it is between MLP and a left candidate then it I think MLP becomes POTFR, if it is between Sarkozy and Valls then Sarkozy wins.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
Not on the latest polling evidence where Valls beat her 55%-45%, some of the lower middle class centre right may vote for Le Pen, the upper middle class centre right would vote for Valls. If it is MLP and Hollande then MLP may win, if it is Valls v MLP then Valls will win. Le Pen will almost certainly be in the second round so your final scenario is unlikely but would be too close to call.
Valls is basically a Blairite, he could certainly beat MLP, he will win most of the middle class vote, she would win most of the working class vote, but he should win overall
The latest poll between Valls and MLP was conducted in April. It is horribly out of date. Are you being purposefully thick?
So why do we pronounce Bicester as Bister and not Buy-cess-ter?
Bitter of Bicester bans muslims!!
Shall we have our next lunch meet up in Bicester?
I might get my eyebrows done. You OK waiting outside!!
Nah, I might have to meet and talk to some southern Jessies.
Racism and Homophobia in one sentence excellent.
Should be OK to meet soon Mrs BJ is having her operation in 3 weeks.
Hope everything goes well!
Thanks.
Have you ever been to a presentation by Les Nixon, Sunil.
I am going to one at Barrow Hill engine shed on Thursday.
Am told he is brilliant.
Les Nixon - Down Memory Lane
We can look forward to another first class presentation from Les as he again delves into his extensive collection of images portraying the railway scene over more than fifty years
Not heard of him till tonight to be fair, but sounds very interesting.
I think you'll find that Islam is quite a modern religion when compared to the New Testament- post dates Christ by a good 700 years, and doesn't come out with any of the weird supernatural claptrap about Virgin births, an ethereal god procreating a human child and people rising from the dead.
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
Its still all just a bunch of Middle Eastern Sky Fairies whichever branch you chose to follow.
Hopefully the next prophet will keep his mouth shut and let us all get on with our lives in peace.
"That until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned: That until there are no longer first-class and second class citizens of any nation; That until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; That until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race; That until that day, the dream of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but never attained"
(He may have been the last prophet but one, I suppose. Maybe the next prophet is Tom Cruise....)
[NB No, I don't subscribe to any prophets either, but it's interesting to try to figure out how they are created]
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
1. If -0.8 to +0.6 per cent is the consensus, the uncertainty will win it for REMAIN 2. Agreed that neither side is winning on this issue 3. Inherently favourable to LEAVE but as Scotland showed not enough
I think the best thing to do is to work out why Scotland voted NO and to see if the same will apply to REMAIN (I suspect it will).
will a remain vote then be followed by massive electoral success for an anti EU party?
1. If -0.8 to +0.6 per cent is the consensus, the uncertainty will win it for REMAIN 2. Agreed that neither side is winning on this issue 3. Inherently favourable to LEAVE but as Scotland showed not enough
I think the best thing to do is to work out why Scotland voted NO and to see if the same will apply to REMAIN (I suspect it will).
will a remain vote then be followed by massive electoral success for an anti EU party?
I think some people go for the I was hacked/fraped defence, but I'm not a techie.
Re the defence lawyers, the worst offenders are the CDS, and their advice with out of court disposals.
You'll be able to walk out of here without a stain on your character if you accept this caution....
How anyone falls for the caution line I will never understand. The only proper response must be, "If you have the evidence charge me", the plod very, very seldom do have the evidence and are usually trying the caution route because they want to avoid doing the work to get it or, in not a few cases, because they have made a horrible error of judgement know they will never have sufficient evidence. In either case they are being underhand and breaking the rules but as you say they keep getting away with it, and, of course, the person still ends up with a criminal record.
Another scandal is the length of time people are kept on 38(2), or whatever they call it these days, bail. It is an abuse of process and caused solely by the plod being useless and inefficient. The law should really be changed to set a maximum period of bail to something like six weeks and to allow only one such period.
I think it is people under duress.
They think they're going to prison then someone says if you agree to a caution you won't have to go to prison or and your name won't be in the paper.
Bail is another farce.
But I'm off to bed and will pick this up with you another day.
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
Do British bureaucrats really classify Indian people as white? Come now.
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
It's pretty clear that the centre right is comfortable with voting for MLP in a run off between MLP and a left candidate, she would beat Valls and definitely beat Hollande. If it is between MLP and a left candidate then it I think MLP becomes POTFR, if it is between Sarkozy and Valls then Sarkozy wins.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
Not on the latest polling evidence where Valls beat her 55%-45%, some of the lower middle class centre right may vote for Le Pen, the upper middle class centre right would vote for Valls. If it is MLP and Hollande then MLP may win, if it is Valls v MLP then Valls will win. Le Pen will almost certainly be in the second round so your final scenario is unlikely but would be too close to call.
Valls is basically a Blairite, he could certainly beat MLP, he will win most of the middle class vote, she would win most of the working class vote, but he should win overall
The latest poll between Valls and MLP was conducted in April. It is horribly out of date. Are you being purposefully thick?
I highly doubt anything much will change, Le Pen may go up a little in the first round but she was already ahead anyway (and some of that increase may come from Sarkozy voters), I doubt many of the 55% intending to vote for Valls in Round 2 will have switched to Le Pen
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
When, as we will hear constantly over the next week or two, about potential for anti-Muslim backlash, how Muslims are getting a raw deal etc etc etc, and the upshot is likely to be in part more funding for "community relations" projects,
I do think of the 100,000's of Asians and Chinese immigrants, mainly Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, that have integrated well, are doing extremely well academically and really succeeding and think to some extent they get a really raw deal for doing too well.
It does not have to, it just needs to do enough to get into the second round with one of the candiaates of the right which is split between the mainstream right of Sarkozy, Juppe and Fillon and the populist right of Le Pen. At the moment the latter is ahead and in a second round they just need to win enough of the middle class vote to see her off. A Corbynite weak left will struggle I agree, but a more centrist left as represented by Valls may still win, especially as the rise of populist parties also threatens the centre right
It's pretty clear that the centre right is comfortable with voting for MLP in a run off between MLP and a left candidate, she would beat Valls and definitely beat Hollande. If it is between MLP and a left candidate then it I think MLP becomes POTFR, if it is between Sarkozy and Valls then Sarkozy wins.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
Not on the latest polling evidence where Valls beat her 55%-45%, some of the lower middle class centre right may vote for Le Pen, the upper middle class centre right would vote for Valls. If it is MLP and Hollande then MLP may win, if it is Valls v MLP then Valls will win. Le Pen will almost certainly be in the second round so your final scenario is unlikely but would be too close to call.
Valls is basically a Blairite, he could certainly beat MLP, he will win most of the middle class vote, she would win most of the working class vote, but he should win overall
The latest poll between Valls and MLP was conducted in April. It is horribly out of date. Are you being purposefully thick?
I highly doubt anything much will change, Le Pen may go up a little in the first round but she was already ahead anyway (and some of that increase may come from Sarkozy voters), I doubt many of the 55% intending to vote for Valls in Round 2 will have switched to Le Pen
There is a lot of wishful thinking about Le Pen from people who do not like Muslims as an undifferentiated class of people, of which there are many on PB comments. People here are slow to discount her in the way they do other anti-system candidates like, say, Donald Trump.
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
Reinforcing the point that more middle class Hindus and Sikhs are moving to the Tories while other minorities are more likely to stick with Labour
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
Do British bureaucrats really classify Indian people as white? Come now.
No - but they think of them as "not a minority". In this kind of thinking "minority" = "person who is/has a problem". Hindus, Jews, Chinese, Japanese etc are just too successful to "count".
There is an assumption that Labour voters are going to break more than 2:1 in favour of Remain. It overlooks the massive concerns about immigration and the patriotic element in the Labour vote.
The polling evidence supports that, most of the 'patriotic', anti immigration working class are now backing UKIP, the Labour vote now is made up of the public sector, the poor and those on welfare and non-Indian ethnic minorities
and 40% of Indian ethnic minorities. Brent and Ealing Southall voted Labour heavily.
This matches my personal experience of family and friends who are immigrants - to them, Labour have decided to be the friends shouty wahbist types. They (my friends and family) do not feel that they are listened to.
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
When, as we will hear constantly over the next week or two, about potential for anti-Muslim backlash, how Muslims are getting a raw deal etc etc etc, and the upshot is likely to be in part more funding for "community relations" projects,
I do think of the 100,000's of Asians and Chinese immigrants, mainly Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, that have integrated well, are doing extremely well academically and really succeeding and think to some extent they get a really raw deal for doing too well.
Comments
But I think one key issue is what Dr Fox has described i.e. the difference between what you are told about Islam being superior, having a glorious past etc and the reality of the Muslim world now and the position of Muslims within the Western world. Hussey describes well how humiliating the effect of colonialism has been on the French North African states and how the young there both long to get to France and despise it and that this duality is also seen within the North African communities within France. That may be a specific French issue, of course
But the difference between reality and what you believe you ought to be can drive some to try and bridge that gap in disastrously violent ways, particularly if there is some preacher telling you that this gap is all the fault of others (the West, America, Jews, etc etc). If you feel a failure much easier to believe that it is down to the malice / actions of others than to embark on the necessary critical self-reflection, particularly if the milieu you're in doesn't particularly encourage the latter.
According to Thames Valley Police , a 43-year-old woman was arrested under section 19 of the Public Order Act.
Serves the silly cow right IMO
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11997334/Woman-arrested-over-beauty-salons-no-Muslims-Paris-attack-post.html
In many ways the Koran is much more plausible than the New Testament- but that isn't saying much to be honest. The Old Testament is really quite weird- but then it is older.
Hopefully the next prophet will be even more normal.
Thames Valley Police detained the woman after the posting - made following the Paris terrorist attacks - said that people from the "Islamic faith" were no longer welcome at the Blinks of Bicester spa and beauty salon.
The Facebook postings read: "Blinks of Bicester are no longer taking bookings from anyone from the Islamic faith whether you are UK granted with passport or not" and "Sorry but time to put my country first".
If the perceived threat is to European values, the result may be to make people in this country feel more European.
"Publishing or distributing written material.
(1)A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."
One wonders what racial hatred is likely to be stirred up or she intended to stir up (assuming that what she wrote was threatening, abusive or insulting).
The section refers to racial hatred. Not religious hatred.
Unless there's been a later amendment.
The penalty of being a broad church is that there will always be a few thick tory backbenchers. Unfortunately in the low circles I normally travel I am unlikely to be able to meet them. Its a pity because I would tell them to their faces in no uncertain manner what I think of them.
The need in places like Syria is for democracy. For people to be able to overthrow their government in peace and then in turn for that government to be replaced according to democratic process.
New station, Bicester Village, opened a couple of weeks back, as well as Oxford Parkway.
Compare and contrast:
Leicester
Alcester
Cirencester
Towcester
But that's not the point, under this conservative govt the Orwellian predictions are becoming a reality.
He was only being helpful
I thought Osborne had made them the nasty pasty party anyway.
France is at war, IS has declared war on it with these actions. It is a clearer case even than Afghanistan, the clearest case since 1939 even. It must be wiped out utterly and we must support our NATO ally France however she wishes.
religious hatred has no such "likely to be stirred up thereby" i.e. recklessness limb. intent only.
As for Mr Surbiton - where ever you are - I am not surprised he fails at english comprehension, but I for one grow tired of repetitive misrepresentation of Mays remarks.
I repeat as well, I do not think she would actually stand or win or make the best next leader.
It's total rubbish. There is no chance of a successful prosecution. This is a "mind your language" piece of intimidation. There is absolutely no way this comes even close to the incitement to hatred provisions. Not even in the same galaxy, never mind same orbit.
There are other pieces of legislation in regards to provision of services that she could be prosecuted under, though not by the police.
As long as she does not admit, this is going nowhere.
It's a strange mess we've got into when people holding up banners in London saying "Behead those who insult Islam" - a very specific incitement to violence, even carefully spelling out the type of violence to be incited - is not caught by that provision but someone saying that she won't take haircut bookings at a salon from Muslims is or might be caught.
Hopefully the next prophet will keep his mouth shut and let us all get on with our lives in peace.
I actually don't see any scenario in which the left can win a run off, not when the fight is going to be over border controls, immigration and terrorism. These are all bread and butter subjects for the right. Especially in France where the left has a particularly poor record on immigration and the EU.
The economy (big business) is the one and only card the IN team have.
All the rest is just nuance and unfathomable noise to the population.
The vote will be about what do you fear most- mass migration, or the economy going tits up- whoever can instil the most fear will win.
It's going to be a horrible, negative, lowest common denominator campaign. I cannot call it now, and I've never lost out on a political bet, ever.
I hope this not another one of those hoaxes you have fallen for again
People are obsessed by it.
Should be OK to meet soon Mrs BJ is having her operation in 3 weeks.
If the intelligence is good, it does cause IS issues because is a lot harder doing things when someone is bombing you heavily every night and not much you can do about it. It still doesn't deal with the problem cases closer to home though.
Yet somehow for some types of complaint, especially when the alleged offender is know and not the sort of person who might cause them a problem th police find that they always have the resources and always trot out the line, "we must investigate when a complaint is made".
As a fine point of interest, and one that you as a lawyer should appreciate, the police clearly knew where to find this woman and she was hardly likely to abscond, so why was an arrest necessary? If the arrest wasn't necessary it is surely illegal.
The stop the war loonies posted something nasty and took it down later. Why were they not prosecuted?
Can the police not just issue some sort of caution? Why arrest some stupid silly person for this?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11991224/NHS-winter-crisis-now-inevitable-think-tanks-warn.html
Put Bicester woman in charge of waiting lists.
She would weed a few patients out for sure
Have to admit I never expected to be pushing her round in a wheelchair quite so soon.
Hoping the op. will make an 80% improvement as we have been told.
In my defence, I've left all my meds in Sheffield and am in pain with my legs and back.
Valls is basically a Blairite, he could certainly beat MLP, he will win most of the middle class vote, she would win most of the working class vote, but he should win overall
Defence lawyers all over the country are allowing the police to get away with arrests that do not need to be made and are thus not only serving their clients very badly they are also depriving their clients and themselves of serious money. Going back a few years the going rate for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment was about £2000 per hour of detention.
Have you ever been to a presentation by Les Nixon, Sunil.
I am going to one at Barrow Hill engine shed on Thursday.
Am told he is brilliant.
Les Nixon - Down Memory Lane
We can look forward to another first class presentation from Les as he again delves into his extensive collection of images portraying the railway scene over more than fifty years
Re the defence lawyers, the worst offenders are the CDS, and their advice with out of court disposals.
You'll be able to walk out of here without a stain on your character if you accept this caution....
As an aside - is 'photoshopped' in the dictionary now?
The police see a tweet or whatever, they want time to go back through and build their case. For example the suspect's internet history might tell us if they intended to cause racial hatred or not.
Leaving the EU would not affect non EU immigration, a lot of which is students and it would affect the status of Britons living abroad.
Another scandal is the length of time people are kept on 38(2), or whatever they call it these days, bail. It is an abuse of process and caused solely by the plod being useless and inefficient. The law should really be changed to set a maximum period of bail to something like six weeks and to allow only one such period.
I must say this is something I do myself, and though it's a bad thing to do, I do kind of hope I'm in the norm on that.
2. Agreed that neither side is winning on this issue
3. Inherently favourable to LEAVE but as Scotland showed not enough
I think the best thing to do is to work out why Scotland voted NO and to see if the same will apply to REMAIN (I suspect it will).
(He may have been the last prophet but one, I suppose. Maybe the next prophet is Tom Cruise....)
[NB No, I don't subscribe to any prophets either, but it's interesting to try to figure out how they are created]
One interesting phenomenon is recent years is the concept of "real" minorities. If you are Chinese, Hindu etc, the progressive types increasingly don't see you as a minority. Something to do with being too successful. Hence the comedy with Silicon Valley firms full of Chinese and Indian programmers being described as all white. This is increasingly the attitude in the UK among the apparatchiks who run the state. And they are seen to be an extension of the Labour party...
They think they're going to prison then someone says if you agree to a caution you won't have to go to prison or and your name won't be in the paper.
Bail is another farce.
But I'm off to bed and will pick this up with you another day.
I do think of the 100,000's of Asians and Chinese immigrants, mainly Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, that have integrated well, are doing extremely well academically and really succeeding and think to some extent they get a really raw deal for doing too well.