politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Assessing Marco Rubio: A surge or just a bubble

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

JosiasJessop said:

Wanderer said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Moses_ said:

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, has died in Florida, aged 85

Within 20 years there will be nobody left alive who has walked on the moon.

If you had predicted that in the 1970s no one would have believed you.

Only 7 left of the original 12. It really is ridiculous we have not gone back in more than 43 years

Indeed. I think the moonlandings, which happened when I was between 4 and 7 years old have had more of an influence on my outlook than any other news event of my life. I don't know if others feel the same, but I think I grew up with the feeling that Humanity could do anything if it really tried. (That's not true of course, but it feels good to be optimistic.)

We can do anything (within reason). It's just that instead of space, our efforts have gone into other areas.

Just look at computer chips. The first integrated circuit was developed in the late 1950s; by the time of the Apollo mission there were chips like the Intel 4004 (a direct predecessor of today's x86 chips, and I think backwards compatible) had 2,300 transistors.

Modern chips can have 6 or 7 billion transistors, using tech as radical as FinFET.

Look at medical progress as well; the arts; cars / aviation (leaving aside speed), etc, etc.

Wanderer said:

Btw, @astVintageSpace is live-tweeting Apollo 14 at this moment. Near the end of the second EVA now.

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

Alanbrooke said:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

I suspect Mr Meeks means organisations whose views he doesn't share should have no access to money.

Pink bowler hat.

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.



Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

Should corporations which provide a public benefit gain tax free status too? I think my company provides many benefits to the community and would love to avoid paying any tax as a result, how do I sign up to that?

Philip_Thompson said:

Alanbrooke said:

Sean_F said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alistair said:

blackburn63 said:

flightpath01 said:

blackburn63 said:

Kippers don't want to go back to anything. All parties have an ideology, Ukip's is a libertarian state with low tax and minimal govt interference. I've attended dozens of meetings, most involve a good row over a few drinks and handshaking at the end. I appreciate that sounds odd to on message, statist, tribalists but it's reality. Whether the party grows or not is moot, we're a group of people tired of the way we're governed.

Most importantly we have a vote on the ghastly EU which is the very epitome of everything kippers dislike: a bureaucratic, all watching, all controlling, undemocratic federal state.

Kippers are forward thinkers with a vision of independence and the power of individuals over the state, I'm far more comfortable with that than the hypocritical stance by so called liberals who bang on about gay marriage but expect us to embrace Muslim culture.

A good exmple of how bonkers you are, and desperate in trying to link support for gay marriage with 'embracing' Muslim' culture.

Oh dear Mr flightpath, you're confused again.

Let me be clear so you can do your own research.

I'm very comfortable about gay marriage, pop down to your local mosque or synagogue and ask them if there'll perform a gay marriage ceremony.

And them come back to me and talk about who is bonkers.

I want the same laws to apply equally and fairly - do you?

No one is forcing any religious establishment to perform gay weddings.

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

I suspect Mr Meeks means organisations whose views he doesn't share should have no access to money.

Pink bowler hat.

How about organisations are simply treated on a level playing field and pay their taxes due and get no funding from the taxpayers? If that means lower but consistent tax rates for everyone then even better.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Philip_Thompson said:

How about organisations are simply treated on a level playing field and pay their taxes due and get no funding from the taxpayers? If that means lower but consistent tax rates for everyone then even better.

I would agree with that. What you could then do if needed was target specific areas of an organisation's operations for tax relief or grants if that work is deemed so vital to the pubic good - I am thinking of the upkeep of ancient buildings or specific charity work.

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Philip_Thompson said:

How about organisations are simply treated on a level playing field and pay their taxes due and get no funding from the taxpayers? If that means lower but consistent tax rates for everyone then even better.

I would agree with that. What you could then do if needed was target specific areas of an organisation's operations for tax relief or grants if that work is deemed so vital to the pubic good - I am thinking of the upkeep of ancient buildings or specific charity work.

In principle I agree. I don't think campaigning, whether religious or secular, should be covered by charitable status. Nor should gifts to political parties be exempt from Inheritance Tax.

I suppose the arguments then come down to whether some activities are seen as charitable or not eg animal welfare.

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

Should corporations which provide a public benefit gain tax free status too? I think my company provides many benefits to the community and would love to avoid paying any tax as a result, how do I sign up to that?

"Public Benefit" is the key test to determine whether any not for profit organisation can claim charitable status, under the Act of 2006.

There's a perfectly valid argument that such organisations should not receive any tax privileges, and be treated like any other club or association, but up to now, governments have found the arrangement beneficial (they also give some nifty tax benefits to political parties).

So if I run a pub/restaurant which provides a public benefit of providing community atmosphere for the town, food and drink for people, somewhere for people who don't pay for Sky to watch live sports (even if they don't buy anything) then that's providing many public benefits to the local area. Heck pub is short for public house. I don't need to pay taxes then?

Treating political parties on a level playing field with the people they write laws for sounds like a good thing too. Maybe tax rates wouldn't rise so quickly if they were affected.

It would have to be a not for profit organisation, like many public schools.

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

Should corporations which provide a public benefit gain tax free status too? I think my company provides many benefits to the community and would love to avoid paying any tax as a result, how do I sign up to that?

"Public Benefit" is the key test to determine whether any not for profit organisation can claim charitable status, under the Act of 2006.

There's a perfectly valid argument that such organisations should not receive any tax privileges, and be treated like any other club or association, but up to now, governments have found the arrangement beneficial (they also give some nifty tax benefits to political parties).

So if I run a pub/restaurant which provides a public benefit of providing community atmosphere for the town, food and drink for people, somewhere for people who don't pay for Sky to watch live sports (even if they don't buy anything) then that's providing many public benefits to the local area. Heck pub is short for public house. I don't need to pay taxes then?

Treating political parties on a level playing field with the people they write laws for sounds like a good thing too. Maybe tax rates wouldn't rise so quickly if they were affected.

It would have to be a not for profit organisation, like many public schools.

Alanbrooke said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Philip_Thompson said:

How about organisations are simply treated on a level playing field and pay their taxes due and get no funding from the taxpayers? If that means lower but consistent tax rates for everyone then even better.

I would agree with that. What you could then do if needed was target specific areas of an organisation's operations for tax relief or grants if that work is deemed so vital to the pubic good - I am thinking of the upkeep of ancient buildings or specific charity work.

In principle I agree. I don't think campaigning, whether religious or secular, should be covered by charitable status. Nor should gifts to political parties be exempt from Inheritance Tax.

I suppose the arguments then come down to whether some activities are seen as charitable or not eg animal welfare.

charity should be based on how much money reaches the front line of the causes they advance. Too many charities these days are direct marketing organisations.

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I'm all in favour of freedom of conscience. But religious groups that cannot abide by the state's values should not retain tax privileged status. They're free not to perform gay weddings. And we're free to decide that as a consequence they should not get largesse from the state.

As with making immigrants embrace "British values", it's elusive to pin down quite what values we should require in order to gain privileges of any kind. The Charity Commissioners attempt to decide, and make lots of decisions that others might disagree with. Should Scientology benefit? Moderate religious groups? Peaceful fundamentalist groups? Eton? Groups who wish to work towards ending animal experiments (I have an interest there)? (The current answers are No/Yes/not sure/Yes/No)

I honestly don't have a clue how it can be addressed in a fair and systematic way. The current arrangement of having an unelected quango do its best is a very British fudge, and in the absence of a logical approach maybe that's best, but it's not great.

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

By definition, any religious organisation is bound to have beliefs and practices which differ from those of the State, at any point in time. Religious organisations should either be charitable (if they're deemed to provide a public benefit) or they shouldn't (if they're deemed not to).

There are many charities that espouse views that conflict with those of the government of the day.

Should corporations which provide a public benefit gain tax free status too? I think my company provides many benefits to the community and would love to avoid paying any tax as a result, how do I sign up to that?

"Public Benefit" is the key test to determine whether any not for profit organisation can claim charitable status, under the Act of 2006.

There's a perfectly valid argument that such organisations should not receive any tax privileges, and be treated like any other club or association, but up to now, governments have found the arrangement beneficial (they also give some nifty tax benefits to political parties).

So if I run a pub/restaurant which provides a public benefit of providing community atmosphere for the town, food and drink for people, somewhere for people who don't pay for Sky to watch live sports (even if they don't buy anything) then that's providing many public benefits to the local area. Heck pub is short for public house. I don't need to pay taxes then?

Treating political parties on a level playing field with the people they write laws for sounds like a good thing too. Maybe tax rates wouldn't rise so quickly if they were affected.

It would have to be a not for profit organisation, like many public schools.

Not for profit but wages, even high wages, are allowed with charitable organisations. So if I state that the organisation is now not for profit but pay myself and my staff wages equivalent to what the profits would have been then everything is OK?

Wanderer said:

JosiasJessop said:

Wanderer said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Moses_ said:

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, has died in Florida, aged 85

Within 20 years there will be nobody left alive who has walked on the moon.

If you had predicted that in the 1970s no one would have believed you.

Only 7 left of the original 12. It really is ridiculous we have not gone back in more than 43 years

Indeed. I think the moonlandings, which happened when I was between 4 and 7 years old have had more of an influence on my outlook than any other news event of my life. I don't know if others feel the same, but I think I grew up with the feeling that Humanity could do anything if it really tried. (That's not true of course, but it feels good to be optimistic.)

We can do anything (within reason). It's just that instead of space, our efforts have gone into other areas.

Just look at computer chips. The first integrated circuit was developed in the late 1950s; by the time of the Apollo mission there were chips like the Intel 4004 (a direct predecessor of today's x86 chips, and I think backwards compatible) had 2,300 transistors.

Modern chips can have 6 or 7 billion transistors, using tech as radical as FinFET.

Look at medical progress as well; the arts; cars / aviation (leaving aside speed), etc, etc.

All true.

What we can't do is abrogate the laws of physics and travel between the stars faster than light.

another_richard said:

Alanbrooke said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Philip_Thompson said:

How about organisations are simply treated on a level playing field and pay their taxes due and get no funding from the taxpayers? If that means lower but consistent tax rates for everyone then even better.

I would agree with that. What you could then do if needed was target specific areas of an organisation's operations for tax relief or grants if that work is deemed so vital to the pubic good - I am thinking of the upkeep of ancient buildings or specific charity work.

In principle I agree. I don't think campaigning, whether religious or secular, should be covered by charitable status. Nor should gifts to political parties be exempt from Inheritance Tax.

I suppose the arguments then come down to whether some activities are seen as charitable or not eg animal welfare.

charity should be based on how much money reaches the front line of the causes they advance. Too many charities these days are direct marketing organisations.

And which are in effect involuntarily funded by the taxpayer.

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right movement, bolstered by foreign-born fascists living in the UK, is becoming increasingly violent as it seeks to orchestrate attacks against British Muslims, according to new analysis of the network of militant rightwing groups.

Buoyed by the normalisation of Islamophobic rhetoric by elements of the mainstream media, the increasingly radicalised ideology adopted by the UK’s far-right movement will lead to greater confrontation, says the anti-racist group Hope Not Hate.

The warnings come ahead of a planned demonstration by Polish neo-nazis and football hooligans in Manchester later this month in support of a “British white country”, which they have called: “Fuck Islam & Isis”. Intelligence indicates that a violent British far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

That old bogeryman again. There's more left wing violence in the UK than right wing. The righties are just too spilt and disorganised to do much. But it helps the Guardian sell grievance.

JosiasJessop said:

LondonBob said:

NickPalmer said:

People interested in the Syrian war may find this site which I stumbled across interesting - it has a lot of material flooding in:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Hot+Topics/Syrian+Civil+War

Because of the sheer volume of Iranian stuff it gives the impression of bias, but it also includes material which is anti-Assad and pro-Western, so I'm not sure if it's just that they include everything they get and the Iranians send them more. Certainly Assad's people are sounding cheerful, e.g. abolishing security checkpoints in Latakia since the enemy is now so far off that they aren't needed any more. Aleppo seems to be gradually falling, with a stream of messages reminiscent of the Stalingrad struggle which is seems to resemble - this battle for the cheese factory, that advance into a disputed farm. There was a menacing "If the Sauds intervene that would mean war" report from Russia, though the details seemed to be more legalistic than directly threatening.

A lot of the Iranian stuff would be more accurate than the stuff put out in our own media.

Have read that two brigades from 101st Airborne are going to Iraq, little progress being made there in contrast to Syria. Supposedly the Iranians are also sending more to Syria, people have had enough of the war and they want to end it in three months not six.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/

This is a very good website run by the former head of ME analysis at the DIA in the US. A lot of the loons on here really wouldn't like it.

Someone so important (in your eyes at least) seems to have rather few followers: less than you could count on the hands of a woman tortured by Assad's thugs.

richardDodd said:

Assad was given the job by his father..

Plato_Says said:

Louise Mensch is putting the Leave case better than most

Every week Britain sends half the budget for our schools to Brussels. £350m. Yes, that's the real figure. #Brexit https://t.co/raRi9LWCKr

flightpath01 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right movement, bolstered by foreign-born fascists living in the UK, is becoming increasingly violent as it seeks to orchestrate attacks against British Muslims, according to new analysis of the network of militant rightwing groups.

The warnings come ahead of a planned demonstration by Polish neo-nazis and football hooligans in Manchester later this month in support of a “British white country”, which they have called: “Fuck Islam & Isis”. Intelligence indicates that a violent British far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

The feeble minded are everywhere. It does show the dangers in blind ignorant kneekerk foul mouthed instant ranting.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right movement, bolstered by foreign-born fascists living in the UK, is becoming increasingly violent as it seeks to orchestrate attacks against British Muslims, according to new analysis of the network of militant rightwing groups.

Buoyed by the normalisation of Islamophobic rhetoric by elements of the mainstream media, the increasingly radicalised ideology adopted by the UK’s far-right movement will lead to greater confrontation, says the anti-racist group Hope Not Hate.

The warnings come ahead of a planned demonstration by Polish neo-nazis and football hooligans in Manchester later this month in support of a “British white country”, which they have called: “Fuck Islam & Isis”. Intelligence indicates that a violent British far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

However, workmen today reported seeing a German shepherd diving into the crashing waves off Hastings' seafront, and the RNLI lifeboat crew were scrambled to search the choppy waters.

After scouring the sea for the dog, the crew eventually found the animal paddling 'on its last legs' about a mile away from the shore but feared it 'wasn't going to survive much longer'.

Speedy said:

On topic.
First N.H. tracking poll of the day has the Rubio surge going into reverse, confirming the CNN and ARG tracking polls that showed the same yesterday:

U.M N.H. daily tracking poll

Trump 35 +1
Rubio 14 -1
Cruz 13 -1
Kasich 10 +2
Bush 10 +2
Christie 4 -1
Carson 3 -1
Fiorina 3

http://www.uml.edu/docs/2-6 TOPLINE - UMassLowell-7NEWS NH PRIMARY_tcm18-230852.pdf

But that doesn't matter, there's a debate today.

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

LondonBob said:

another_richard said:

NickPalmer said:

People interested in the Syrian war may find this site which I stumbled across interesting - it has a lot of material flooding in:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Hot+Topics/Syrian+Civil+War

Because of the sheer volume of Iranian stuff it gives the impression of bias, but it also includes material which is anti-Assad and pro-Western, so I'm not sure if it's just that they include everything they get and the Iranians send them more. Certainly Assad's people are sounding cheerful, e.g. abolishing security checkpoints in Latakia since the enemy is now so far off that they aren't needed any more. Aleppo seems to be gradually falling, with a stream of messages reminiscent of the Stalingrad struggle which is seems to resemble - this battle for the cheese factory, that advance into a disputed farm. There was a menacing "If the Sauds intervene that would mean war" report from Russia, though the details seemed to be more legalistic than directly threatening.

What's happening with Cameron's '70,000' strong 'moderate' army ?

Careful mate the loons will accuse you of posting from Moscow, being the super patriots they so obviously are. Of course it avoids having to answer the awkward question as to why, so soon after Iraq, the PM is lying to Parliament and British foreign policy, so obviously against our national interest, has been to destabilise and overthrow the Syrian government creating the current refugee crisis.

Cameron didn't create the refugee crisis, you Moscow-based loon. Assad did that when the civil war started.

Assad's the sick bastard to blame: no-one else, and certainly not the civilians his regime has been killing in their tens of thousands, inside and outside prison. Not that I would expect you to accept that.

Your usual bias, no worse than the lovely PEOPLE Cameron is supporting. Two cheeks of the same ARSE. At least Assad was elected to govern Syria.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Thompson, add -ology to the end of the company name, point to Scientology being accorded religious status simply because it defines itself as such, appoint your CEO archpriest, and enjoy the reduced tax status.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Klopp misses Liverpool game....

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

That old bogeryman again. There's more left wing violence in the UK than right wing. The righties are just too spilt and disorganised to do much. But it helps the Guardian sell grievance.

I don't know why the far right keeps on holding demonstrations outside my place in Manchester.

I'm going to start taking it personally now, plus their grasp of history is appalling.

I think I would break their hearts if I told them that I'm probably a closer descendant of Saint George than they are.

I'm amazed there's any far right in Manchester.

I hope you're civil and bring them both a hot cup of tea while they're protesting.

There's been a strong EDL presence in Manchester a few times a year, but mostly they get outnumbered by shoppers who get pissed off at them for the blocking them.

Easy to spot, they have appalling fashion tastes, knocked off Burberry, One True Saxon clothing, baseball caps, most people ignore them, they mostly sing 'there ain't no black in the Union Jack' and fuck Islam and Immigration type ditties. I did once spot a red hand flag, which shocked me. Ulstermen engaging in sectarianism, say it ain't so?

I once walked into a demo between them and UAF, was very unpleasant (not realising they were going to be there)

I'm specifically enjoined by my contract from going near any protesters as I nearly incited a riot when the hard left turned outside work a few years ago and I started waving fifty pound notes at them and was tempted to start throwing soap at them.

MP_SE said:

LucyJones said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right movement, bolstered by foreign-born fascists living in the UK, is becoming increasingly violent as it seeks to orchestrate attacks against British Muslims, according to new analysis of the network of militant rightwing groups.

Buoyed by the normalisation of Islamophobic rhetoric by elements of the mainstream media, the increasingly radicalised ideology adopted by the UK’s far-right movement will lead to greater confrontation, says the anti-racist group Hope Not Hate.

The warnings come ahead of a planned demonstration by Polish neo-nazis and football hooligans in Manchester later this month in support of a “British white country”, which they have called: “Fuck Islam & Isis”. Intelligence indicates that a violent British far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

Hope Not Hate desperately looking for an upswing in far-right "fascism" to justify their own existence.

I think the UK is far too tolerant to ever see a revival of the far-right. These groups do not seem to ever attract a great deal of support. Usually it is just a handful of deadbeats.

Speedy said:

I think the blame has to be at those who thought that promoting democracy in the middle east was a good idea.
And of course the impulse of governments to export their domestic problems when they are down in the polls.

It's not a coincidence that all around europe there is a war zone that was fueled by unpopular european governments who tried to boost their popularity in the polls by appearing macho in foreign and military affairs.

SeanT said:

JonathanD said:

flightpath01 said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Re the previous comments on Windows 10, I thought of this (although it is a bit old now).
https://xkcd.com/528/

Windows 10 seems to be working alright on my laptop (this is being typed, mistyped, on a tablet). It's a HP Pavilion bought in PC World at about £150 off. Reasonable value. Came with W8 and I left it at that, but it looked to have installed 10 behind my back. Its main annoyance is hitting prt scr by accident and sendind screen shots to some cloud gizmo. But very good battery life. Pity you have to 'rent' MS Office.

I tried a chrome book , great for browsing but I did not like the cloud word processing software. Then the keys started sticking, seems to be so common that PC World gave me a voucher back to buy something else, ie the Pavilion. Starts quickly and has 8 hrs battery. Not too heavy.
End of advert.

PS I hate printers and the cost of ink.

Windowd 10 is pretty solid and much faster than previous versions.

You also off the PrntScr to cloud option.

I just bought a new Toshiba laptop running Windows 10, got it for £600 down from £800 at PC world.

It's a delight. Beautiful, smooth, intuitive. Better than anything I've bought from Apple in a while, and definitely better than my lumbering apple laptop which cost £600 more a year ago

iOS is just rubbish in comparison. I will never buy another Apple MacBook.

malcolmg said:

he had a few helpers.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

JosiasJessop said:

LondonBob said:

NickPalmer said:

People interested in the Syrian war may find this site which I stumbled across interesting - it has a lot of material flooding in:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Hot+Topics/Syrian+Civil+War

Because of the sheer volume of Iranian stuff it gives the impression of bias, but it also includes material which is anti-Assad and pro-Western, so I'm not sure if it's just that they include everything they get and the Iranians send them more. Certainly Assad's people are sounding cheerful, e.g. abolishing security checkpoints in Latakia since the enemy is now so far off that they aren't needed any more. Aleppo seems to be gradually falling, with a stream of messages reminiscent of the Stalingrad struggle which is seems to resemble - this battle for the cheese factory, that advance into a disputed farm. There was a menacing "If the Sauds intervene that would mean war" report from Russia, though the details seemed to be more legalistic than directly threatening.

A lot of the Iranian stuff would be more accurate than the stuff put out in our own media.

Have read that two brigades from 101st Airborne are going to Iraq, little progress being made there in contrast to Syria. Supposedly the Iranians are also sending more to Syria, people have had enough of the war and they want to end it in three months not six.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/

This is a very good website run by the former head of ME analysis at the DIA in the US. A lot of the loons on here really wouldn't like it.

Someone so important (in your eyes at least) seems to have rather few followers: less than you could count on the hands of a woman tortured by Assad's thugs.

Naught but Turkish propaganda

isam said:

MP_SE said:

LucyJones said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right movement, bolstered by foreign-born fascists living in the UK, is becoming increasingly violent as it seeks to orchestrate attacks against British Muslims, according to new analysis of the network of militant rightwing groups.

Buoyed by the normalisation of Islamophobic rhetoric by elements of the mainstream media, the increasingly radicalised ideology adopted by the UK’s far-right movement will lead to greater confrontation, says the anti-racist group Hope Not Hate.

The warnings come ahead of a planned demonstration by Polish neo-nazis and football hooligans in Manchester later this month in support of a “British white country”, which they have called: “Fuck Islam & Isis”. Intelligence indicates that a violent British far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

Hope Not Hate desperately looking for an upswing in far-right "fascism" to justify their own existence.

I think the UK is far too tolerant to ever see a revival of the far-right. These groups do not seem to ever attract a great deal of support. Usually it is just a handful of deadbeats.

Every society has its breaking point, and this was pre Rotherham, Rigby, Cologne etc

"Huge numbers of Britons would support an anti-immigration English nationalist party if it was not associated with violence and fascist imagery, according to the largest survey into identity and extremism conducted in the UK.

A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag.

39% of Asian Britons, 34% of white Britons and 21% of black Britons wanted all immigration into the UK to be stopped permanently, or at least until the economy improved. And 43% of Asian Britons, 63% of white Britons and 17% of black Britons agreed with the statement that "immigration into Britain has been a bad thing for the country". Just over half of respondents – 52% – agreed with the proposition that "Muslims create problems in the UK."

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/27/support-poll-support-far-right

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

That old bogeryman again. There's more left wing violence in the UK than right wing. The righties are just too spilt and disorganised to do much. But it helps the Guardian sell grievance.

I don't know why the far right keeps on holding demonstrations outside my place in Manchester.

I'm going to start taking it personally now, plus their grasp of history is appalling.

I think I would break their hearts if I told them that I'm probably a closer descendant of Saint George than they are.

I'm amazed there's any far right in Manchester.

I hope you're civil and bring them both a hot cup of tea while they're protesting.

There's been a strong EDL presence in Manchester a few times a year, but mostly they get outnumbered by shoppers who get pissed off at them for the blocking them.

Easy to spot, they have appalling fashion tastes, knocked off Burberry, One True Saxon clothing, baseball caps, most people ignore them, they mostly sing 'there ain't no black in the Union Jack' and fuck Islam and Immigration type ditties. I did once spot a red hand flag, which shocked me. Ulstermen engaging in sectarianism, say it ain't so?

I once walked into a demo between them and UAF, was very unpleasant (not realising they were going to be there)

I'm specifically enjoined by my contract from going near any protesters as I nearly incited a riot when the hard left turned outside work a few years ago and I started waving fifty pound notes at them and was tempted to start throwing soap at them.

From my time in Manchester ( 5 years ) I never remember seeing anything Far right. Even though the NUS kept inventing them. But then it was headed by Phil Woollas.

Been a few in recent years under the EDL banner, usually outnumbered by the counter protesters, police, shoppers, and football fans.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/recap-english-defence-league-protest-8790228

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/mar/03/edl-march-manchester-handful-arrests

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Bloody Foreigners, coming over here, radicalising British people.

The far-right outfit, the North West Infidels (NWI), are planning to join them.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/06/foreign-born-fascists-radicalise-uk-far-right-movement

That old bogeryman again. There's more left wing violence in the UK than right wing. The righties are just too spilt and disorganised to do much. But it helps the Guardian sell grievance.

I don't know why the far right keeps on holding demonstrations outside my place in Manchester.

I'm going to start taking it personally now, plus their grasp of history is appalling.

I think I would break their hearts if I told them that I'm probably a closer descendant of Saint George than they are.

I'm amazed there's any far right in Manchester.

I hope you're civil and bring them both a hot cup of tea while they're protesting.

There's been a strong EDL presence in Manchester a few times a year, but mostly they get outnumbered by shoppers who get pissed off at them for the blocking them.

Easy to spot, they have appalling fashion tastes, knocked off Burberry, One True Saxon clothing, baseball caps, most people ignore them, they mostly sing 'there ain't no black in the Union Jack' and fuck Islam and Immigration type ditties. I did once spot a red hand flag, which shocked me. Ulstermen engaging in sectarianism, say it ain't so?

I once walked into a demo between them and UAF, was very unpleasant (not realising they were going to be there)

I'm specifically enjoined by my contract from going near any protesters as I nearly incited a riot when the hard left turned outside work a few years ago and I started waving fifty pound notes at them and was tempted to start throwing soap at them.

From my time in Manchester ( 5 years ) I never remember seeing anything Far right. Even though the NUS kept inventing them. But then it was headed by Phil Woollas.

Been a few in recent years under the EDL banner, usually outnumbered by the counter protesters, police, shoppers, and football fans.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/recap-english-defence-league-protest-8790228

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/mar/03/edl-march-manchester-handful-arrests

sounds about as dangerous as the rollmops I'm having for lunch

JosiasJessop said:

Speedy said:

I think the blame has to be at those who thought that promoting democracy in the middle east was a good idea.
And of course the impulse of governments to export their domestic problems when they are down in the polls.

It's not a coincidence that all around europe there is a war zone that was fueled by unpopular european governments who tried to boost their popularity in the polls by appearing macho in foreign and military affairs.

No. The blame is with Assad.

It's a question of when people call for democracy, do we support them or do we support the murdering strongmen such as Assad?

It's one thing to tell people in Scotland (and even the UK with the EU referendum) that we can choose our own path, but it's quite another to tell others in other countries that they are too wee and too pathetic to look after themselves, and they should just stand back and be jailed without trial, abused, and/or murdered.

Democracy's good. As an example, hopefully Myanmar will start a recovery now it looks as though democracy of a sort has started.

You are right in one thing: the ME has been the playground of rival outside groups for centuries. Perhaps its time to actually let the people rule themselves and end that cycle. Although that might require some of the countries to look very different. if not, the cycle of oppression and death will just continue.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Going to have to really get a move on in the cricket....

Richard_Tyndall said:

MarqueeMark said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Moses_ said:

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, has died in Florida, aged 85

Within 20 years there will be nobody left alive who has walked on the moon.

If you had predicted that in the 1970s no one would have believed you.

Only 7 left of the original 12. It really is ridiculous we have not gone back in more than 43 years

Why go back to the moon? It's boring....

Its a staging post for going further out. Being able to start stellar exploration from the moon is a fraction of the energy cost of launching from Earth.

Richard_Tyndall said:

MarqueeMark said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

Moses_ said:

Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, has died in Florida, aged 85

Within 20 years there will be nobody left alive who has walked on the moon.

If you had predicted that in the 1970s no one would have believed you.

Only 7 left of the original 12. It really is ridiculous we have not gone back in more than 43 years

Why go back to the moon? It's boring....

Its a staging post for going further out. Being able to start stellar exploration from the moon is a fraction of the energy cost of launching from Earth.

Speedy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Speedy said:

On topic.
First N.H. tracking poll of the day has the Rubio surge going into reverse, confirming the CNN and ARG tracking polls that showed the same yesterday:

U.M N.H. daily tracking poll

Trump 35 +1
Rubio 14 -1
Cruz 13 -1
Kasich 10 +2
Bush 10 +2
Christie 4 -1
Carson 3 -1
Fiorina 3

http://www.uml.edu/docs/2-6 TOPLINE - UMassLowell-7NEWS NH PRIMARY_tcm18-230852.pdf

But that doesn't matter, there's a debate today.

Saviour-of-the-Repulicans Rubio just four points ahead of dead-in-the-water-why-hasn't-he-suspended-his-campaign-yet Jeb Bush?

The weird thing is that there is still saturated media coverage of Rubio, so that's not his problem there, he got a boost of around 7 points from Iowa but that's it so far.
No sustained momentum so far despite favourable media coverage , instead his surge is reversing.