carni 10,046 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 2 hours ago, DJ360 said: Those who have also shared the delights of a Colonoscopy will not need me to remind them of the other aspects of 'preparation'. Those who haven't really don't need to know.. Three since last August for me DJ.? All the best for this afternoon, Will be awaiting your report later. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cliff Ton 10,005 Posted November 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 49 minutes ago, Brew said: made you think and not simply accept the garbage we are bombarded with. It may not change your views but looking at things from a different perspective can give you a new insight and may even reinforce your opinion. I agree. My problem is that I'm very uncommitted politically. I can see good and bad in both sides of most arguments. I totally can't understand people who say "I always vote Labour, or I always vote Conservative". That to me is the worst kind of non-thinking. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gem 1,421 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Gem said: Jill your post regarding finding 27 virgins made me laugh but I then read the comment made by RR and that was not funny and the sad part it is so true. Oooops should read 72 finding 27 would be hard enough, good luck with that one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
meeowed 314 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 good point brew I was never any good at snap even at school and the lad i played had a stutter meeowed 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 Your number may well be correct Gem. They are called Houris and there is no specific number mentioned, but their physical description is quite graphic depending which version you read. The figure 72 came along much later (around the 1500's) but it doesn't say they are all for one man. That's either a misconception or wishful thinking Incidentally the same passages claim that the inhabitants of hell are mostly women! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
meeowed 314 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 i bet jill sparrow has gone to fetch the frying pan look at this lump on my head meeowed 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 21 hours ago, MargieH said: On a lighter note, the main thing I see I see in my mirror is an old lady (don't know where she came from) who needs a new birthday suit for Christmas Tell me when you're going for a fitting Margie and we will have a meeting to end all meetings! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jill Sparrow 9,664 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 52 minutes ago, meeowed said: i bet jill sparrow has gone to fetch the frying pan look at this lump on my head meeowed Not at all, meeowed. You must be mixing me up with my paternal grandmother, Kate Sparrow. She would certainly have clocked you with the frying pan! Or anyone else for that matter! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Beekay 4,398 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 1 hour ago, Brew said: Tell me when you're going for a fitting Margie and we will have a meeting to end all meetings! I'd definitely pay to see that ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
carni 10,046 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 4 hours ago, carni said: Three since last August for me DJ.? OOPs...Should read August 18. not August 19. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DJ360 6,385 Posted November 20, 2019 Report Share Posted November 20, 2019 Greetings!!. Glad to say I survived the colonoscopy with my innards and most of my dignity intact. I have to say that I've had number of tests recently and not only have the techniques improved so as to be less uncomfortable etc.. but the staff in my local hospital are exceptionally polite, re-assuring and caring. No waiting. Everything explained in advance..opportunity to ask questions etc.. Five Stars. Right.. back to the fray..... 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DJ360 6,385 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 22 hours ago, Brew said: I have no idea if the thrice married Corbyn is or was a fornicator. (you've used the word before but it simply means people having sex) He's been married three times. Johnson is known to have had many many affairs, which in itself is not something I get all moralistic about.. but these have occurred whist he has been married and in the case of Ms Accuri, whilst he was in public office and sorting out Govt. cash for her. 22 hours ago, Brew said: The evidence of his past associations with known terrorists is well documented and seems to me that on the balance of probability he is sympathetic to their causes. My first response to that is to say that sympathy for causes does not imply sympathy for methods. I'd like to see a united Ireland as I believe it is the logical long term outcome once the artificiality created by English domination centuries ago can be resolved. I would not like it to be sorted out by violent methods though and I'm certain Corbyn feels the same. As you well know, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Corbyn has repeatedly condemned all violence, but he has also recognised that terrorism/armed struggle or whatever you wish to label it, often results from genuine grievances. If you think about that.. Corbyn's stance can be interpreted as rather more mature than the UK Govt. response of simply trying to use armed forces to suppress the tip of an iceberg. Corbyn, in common with the British Government, met with Sinn Fein and others long before the Good Friday Agreement in order to seek ways forward in terms of ending conflict. As for Hamas etc.. I don't believe they ever directly targeted the UK or UK interests, but Corbyn recognised their grievance against the Israeli Govt. as do I. I'm certain it's this stance by Corbyn which has led certain groups which 'claim' to represent British Jews, (though other British Jewish groups would disagree) to attack Corbyn. 22 hours ago, Brew said: Does he tell lies? The train journey where Corbyn claimed the carriage he was in was “ram-packed.” and he had to sit on the floor. As luck would have it and by sheer coincidence there happened to be a camera crew handy to film his predicament and make a political video about the issues with the privatised railways. Except the train CCTV filmed him walking past row upon row of empty seats before sitting on the floor. He sat in a seat for the remainder of the journey after making the film. The waffling and excuses that followed were laughable. I can't comment.. having seen none of this stuff. 22 hours ago, Brew said: He claimed Labour membership had risen to 540,000, the most it's ever been. Except it was once over a million. Yes.. it's true that Labour apparently had over a million in the immediate post war period. though counting methods in all parties seem to have been a bit 'iffy' back then. Either way.. its true that the figure he quoted was the highest for a long time and that was really, I think, the point... especially against a collapsing Tory membership. Also, it was not a lie about the economy, or employment etc. 22 hours ago, Brew said: In an interview with the left wing red pepper magazine he boasted he had 'never had any higher education’. North London Polytech doesn't count then? 'Boasted' ? Really?.. or just 'said'? Any way, it's true he attended North London Poly.. but it doesn't automatically follow that the course he pursued was a HE course. Info is sketchy. From Wiki : Quote Corbyn began a course in Trade Union Studies at North London Polytechnic but left after a year without a degree after a series of arguments with his tutors over the curriculum.[30 It says he left without a degree.. but doesn't make clear whether the course he was on was a degree course or something leading to... 22 hours ago, Brew said: And finally I've said before about his claim of supporting the Good Friday Agreement, he actually made a speech in Parliament against it. Actually, he didn't. Again from Wiki: Quote He voted against the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement, saying "We believe that the agreement strengthens rather than weakens the border between the six and the 26 counties, and those of us who wish to see a United Ireland oppose the agreement for that reason."[86] In 1994, Corbyn signed a Commons motion condemning the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings, which killed 21 people.[82] In 1998, he supported and voted for the Good Friday Agreement, saying he looked forward to "peace, hope and reconciliation in Ireland in the future."[64] I'd say that last Wiki quote paints a picture of Corbyn which is far closer to the one he consistently and unswervingly delivers as Leader of the Opposition, than the 'Bomb Throwing Terrorist Sympathiser' he is falsely portrayed as in the press. For me.. Corbyn has two major failings. 1. He is far too honest ever to make a leader of a nation which favours bullshit over honesty. 2. He is so fundamentally human that he tries far too hard to please all of the people all of the time. In this context.. it's also worth remembering that people change over time. Youthful rebellion changes to more circumspect methods, whilst the fundamental objective stays the same. But. Whatever his failings, I'd take Corbyn over a dozen Johnsons and I also never forget that he is the temporary leader of the party whose principles, policies and objectives remain closer to mine than any other party. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DJ360 6,385 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 10 hours ago, Cliff Ton said: I agree. My problem is that I'm very uncommitted politically. I can see good and bad in both sides of most arguments. I totally can't understand people who say "I always vote Labour, or I always vote Conservative". That to me is the worst kind of non-thinking. I think I can see your first point Kev, in that even I do not condemn everything the Tories do. I do however have great issue with their general principles, and their obvious 'direction of travel'. On your second point.. my position is simple, and 'non thinking' definitely doesn't figure. I have studied politics, and my own principles, for long enough to know that Labour still most closely align to the policies and principles which I believe are most likely to deliver the sort of society I wish to live in. If that ever changes.. so will my vote. I cannot forsee any time in the near future when I am likely to be satisfied with, much less enthusiastic about, the Conservative party. I think you said a bit earlier that some posts had you losing the will to live.. Obviously you don't mean mine.. but the thing is that Politics is not a subject that can be discussed in any meaningful way via slogans. The issues and the choices are complex. Sloganisers seek to reduce things to soundbytes.which may grab votes in the short term.. but solve nothing in the long term. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oztalgian 2,922 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 52 minutes ago, DJ360 said: Politics is not a subject that can be discussed in any meaningful way via slogans. Don't know about political slogans in the UK but our pollies love three or four word slogans. They use these because they say that is all that the electors can remember. They then use them over and over again until on hearing them the electors want to vomit, they know then that they are getting the message through. Some Liberal (Conservative) slogans, "Jobs and Growth" "Choose real Change" "Stop the boats" Some Labor slogans "A new way" "Australia deserves better" "We'll put people first" The Greens "A future for all of us" Not forgetting the best of all time when back in 1977 Don Chipp leader of the Democrats coined "Keep the bastards honest" which gained the party the balance of power in the Senate (The Upper House). I think this is still relevant today. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jill Sparrow 9,664 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 Tinnies All Round! Wonder who's likely to adopt that one? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 23 minutes ago, DJ360 said: He's been married three times. Johnson is known to have had many many affairs, which in itself is not something I get all moralistic about.. but these have occurred whist he has been married and in the case of Ms Accuri, whilst he was in public office and sorting out Govt. cash for her. But you can't defend him by saying 'well the other chap is worse' I'm not getting bent of shape about his love life to be honest. Johnson is hardly 'loves young dream' so his lady friends knew what they were getting into. 29 minutes ago, DJ360 said: My first response to that is to say that sympathy for causes does not imply sympathy for methods. Understandable had he said when making a speeches at these meetings, 'I'll support your cause if you give up the violence', but he didn't. It seems to me he made no conditions or caveats. Denying he had ever met with the IRA was a lie and an easily proven one at that. I'm not talking about Sinn Fein meetings. Perhaps he suffers from selective memory loss. The government admitted they had dealings with the IRA leadership so why continue to deny it? I fail to understand anyone who wants a united Ireland simply because both sides occupy the same bit of rock and a distorted sense of history. IF the people of Ulster decide for themselves, then fine, other wise no. You are quite right I confused the Anglo-Irish agreement ... If we are taking the history into account then perhaps Canada. New Zealand, Australia and the US should be handed back. Maybe Alaska back to Russia or even further back Spain claimed the territory. Hamas and Hezbollah have not, as far as I know, threatened the UK but who they threaten is not a prerequisite for establishing their credentials as terrorists. Showing his ability to switch and change he now says that he regrets calling the people (Hamas) who financed his trip, a series of three to the middle east, 'friends'. They would hardly pay for Corbyn and his wife to have a freebie jaunt if they thought he was an enemy. He was even reported to the Parliamentary Ethics Committee. As for the Palestine conflict again applying historical data Israel existed hundreds of years before the tribes of Palestine came along, so who has a legitimate claim? 35 minutes ago, DJ360 said: As you well know, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter The difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is in the name. One uses terror tactics on innocents whilst the other does not deliberately target women and children. 2 hours ago, DJ360 said: I can't comment.. having seen none of this stuff. I'm amazed! 1 hour ago, DJ360 said: Also, it was not a lie about the economy, or employment etc. I didn't say it was but, when is something not true a lie? He said the highest ever, you say he meant the highest for a long time. Is this a nuance, or a lie? 2 hours ago, DJ360 said: 'Boasted' ? Really?.. or just 'said'? Any way, it's true he attended North London Poly.. but it doesn't automatically follow that the course he pursued was a HE course. Info is sketchy. There seems little to no reason the mention it unless it was to make a point, something he is proud of, i.e. boasting. The course could be cake decorating for all I care but. he denied attending 'any' further education and it's simply not true. 2 hours ago, DJ360 said: He is so fundamentally human that he tries far too hard to please all of the people all of the time. And we all know how successful a policy of appeasement was ... He may be temporary at the moment but I believe and his Momentum cohorts are planning a more permanent position, They have made a start by weeding out moderates who may oppose him. By the way I'm please the hospital doodah went OK 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Oztalgian said: They use these because they say that is all that the electors can remember. It's perfectly true Ozt, Joe Public has the attention span of a goldfish. Advert copy writers know this and strive for a snappy by line that conveys the message but is easily remembered. £350 million for the NHS Leave means leave Get Brexit done For the many not the few ... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oztalgian 2,922 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 Brew, DJ360, Is it a given that the views on Brexit which is a one-off issue will likely decide the outcome of the election? Here in OZ our mainstream media doesn't give us much coverage of their other policies and looking at UK media it is hard to get a balanced and unbiased picture of what is being offered. Is there a neutral source? As an outsider it appears that Brexit has blown apart the traditional Labour/Conservative support base and I doubt the accuracy of any of the pollsters or pundits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 Long answer made short OZ … no. Col and I will probably differ on the degree of bias in the various media. Col sees the BBC as right wing, I think it has its moments but on balance it's about as neutral as it gets. Some critics even claim it as a hotbed of socialism. It's all a matter of perspective. Something will always be a 'fair and unbiased view' when you agree with what it says and part of a conspiracy when you don't. One thing you have understood is how far the nation has split. I have had an interest in current affairs since my days as a student. In that long, long time I've never known circumstances, not even the miners strike, polarise people to the same degree as Brexit. It doesn't help of course when it's almost impossible to trust the current crop of politicians. The conservatives are totally obnoxious and after getting rid of any with half a sense of decency, led by a complete slime ball and a prat. Labour is a step towards totalitarianism led by the sinister group Momentum and fronted by a man who has turned prevarication and obfuscation into a fine art. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
meeowed 314 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 HOT OF THE PRESS it seems a close run thing between the Bullingdon buffoon and Catastrophic Corbyn but latest reports show lord Biro and the Elvis militant party just edging it with the save the Frogs policy according to last nights Nottingham Post Although I thought we had saved the Frogs twice already no matter must catch up with Celebrity get me out of here and the latest kate price press release I may even get chance to catch Diane Abbots facebook page Bliss isnt it a wonderful time we live in excitement plus meeowed 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DJ360 6,385 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 8 hours ago, Brew said: But you can't defend him by saying 'well the other chap is worse' But whatever your intention Brew. that's the effect of your posts on Corbyn. You don't usually dismiss Johnson et.al. in the same way, or continually hark back to his past failings. You really really don't like Corbyn and it shows. My view is as ever. He wouldn't be my first choice, but there's nothing in his policies that I find objectionable and nothing in his past which I can't forgive. Whether Corbyn's policies are achievable or practical frankly worries me far less than what I previously described as the 'direction of travel' of the Tories. This latter because I genuinely believe Corbyn's always been driven by the correct, humanitarian objectives, even if he's got the immediate actions wrong. Which of us can claim that we always got things right? By coincidence, I've just read something on Facebook which says.. in effect : " I don't care how much you hate Corbyn. I don't care if he goosed your mother in 1978. Nothing that Corbyn has ever done or ever will do can be as bad as what the Tories have done to this country in the last 10 years and will continue to do in the future if you elect them again". That pretty much sums up my view. Also.. if we turn this on its head. How much terrorism is actively supported by the likes of Saudi Arabia and other countries which the UK continues to support, for the benefit of our arms industry etc? 9 hours ago, Brew said: He may be temporary at the moment but I believe and his Momentum cohorts are planning a more permanent position, They have made a start by weeding out moderates who may oppose him. I see that as just the normal process of party 'in fighting'. It was something many true Labour supporters argued for after the 'Tory-Lite' Bliar years. Similar battles have gone on forever in all parties, though the Tories do tend to be better at hiding theirs. Is that good for democracy? Don't you also recognise the same process in the Tories? Also, elsewhere you've raised the spectre of 'Totalitarianism' in the same breath as Labour.. yet you don't seem as worried by the fact that a minority Tory Govt. has used every weapon at its disposal.. the Press/Media, a totally amoral coalition with the DUP, and a deliberate series of actions against the will of parliament and even challenging the Law, to push through its own will. Is that not Totalitarian? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DJ360 6,385 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 10 hours ago, Brew said: Long answer made short OZ … no. Col and I will probably differ on the degree of bias in the various media. Col sees the BBC as right wing, I think it has its moments but on balance it's about as neutral as it gets. Some critics even claim it as a hotbed of socialism. It's all a matter of perspective. Something will always be a 'fair and unbiased view' when you agree with what it says and part of a conspiracy when you don't. My view is that the BBC is something of a 'Curate's Egg'.. 'good in parts' as they say. In simple terms, the BBC is culturally and socially liberal. It does not censor discussion on things such as race, gender, sexual orientation etc. Nor does it supress elements of the arts in the way that for example, the Russian, Chinese and many state broadcasters in religious states do. It is this cultural liberalism which I believe leads some to see the BBC as 'socialist', largely because it's a simple fact that many on the far right adopt , at least publicly.. a very socially/culturally conservative view of things. By contrast, I see the BBC as biased in party political terms, though I see much of that as the result of ineptitude, plus an excessive obsession with 'balance', which in my view produces the opposite of the desired result. It's also obvious that the BBC is 'scared' of offending the government of the day.. for fear of being penalised through funding measures and so on. To expand on the above paragraph. Take BBC Question Time. Time and again it is shown that the audience has been packed with 'plants', who claim to be members of the public, but turn out to be local politicians, agitators etc. This is either deliberate, or just plain poor management. Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections, along with the likes of Isabel Oakshott.. who is the very personification of a political 'player' and 'insider', who uses her alleged position as a journalist and commentator, to push her odious far right views and those of her close associates in the Brexit Party. So, she gets introduced as ''Journalist and Writer', with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party. Also worth noting that the 'Brexit Party' should be disqualified from such exposure because it isn't a political Party in anything other than name, has no manifesto, opaque funding, no membership etc. Another thing I've noticed over the years.. is that the BBC reporting of party politics, seems to subtly alter.. if they detect a similar alteration in public mood. So. currently, the BBC is rather less brutal towards Corbyn than in recent times, as he is increasingly seen as a genuine and credible alternative to Johnson's shambolic present government, appalling record over 10 years, and endless lies. But, it is undeniable that for E.g., the BBC's top political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, started out her appointment by always referring to Jeremy Corbyn as just 'Corbyn', with barely concealed venom.. and also was found to have deliberately altered a video of him to give a negative view of what he said. Defintitely not something which the BBC should be facilitating or condoning. To be fair Ms Kuenssberg has become a lot more apparently balanced in her approach.. though she, and BBC journos in particular are notably lax at asking the questions which really need asking.. and demanding answers. Far too much of the BBC reporting of current affairs goes. " Government today said 'A'.. Opposition pointed out 'B', but Government insisted 'A'" and there it ends.. no analysis, no real question..no holding to account.. just a pointless commentary. As for the press. all but some minor papers owned and directed by big business, the ultra rich and often those don't even live in the UK. Daily Mail, Telegraph, even the Times are just Tory mouthpieces. I don't buy any. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
meeowed 314 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 How on earth you can think the BBC is right wing is beyond comprehension All the red paint should tell you something The seeding of the question time audience has gone on since the days of nick griffin and the BNP The one thing labour seem unable or unwilling to grasp is at the start of any labour government all the money goes off shore No one on the planet volunteers to pay tax The north sea oil companies simply turn off the taps and leave the good old taxpaying public to pick up the bill for corbyns pipe dreams Every labour government since the war has ended in economic disaster and yet they go lemming like for more of the same meeowed 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brew 5,007 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 55 minutes ago, DJ360 said: To expand on the above paragraph. Take BBC Question Time. Time and again it is shown that the audience has been packed with 'plants', who claim to be members of the public, but turn out to be local politicians, agitators etc. This is either deliberate, or just plain poor management. Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections, You and I have agreed that QT is an appalling mishmash of talking heads who's sole objective is generating controversy. Is it bad management? no, it's quite deliberate with plants in the audience and the panelists primed with the questions before the programme even starts. The questions are by members of the public but. members of the public who apply to go on and qive the BBC details of the questions they want to ask. Anyone can apply but they need a virtual life history before you are considered. The more radical the question the more chance you have of asking it. 55 minutes ago, DJ360 said: Also, I'm not the first person to point out that the BBC continually give a platform to the likes of Farage, which allows him TV exposure far in excess of anything which is demanded by his actual success in elections, along with the likes of Isabel Oakshott.. who is the very personification of a political 'player' and 'insider', who uses her alleged position as a journalist and commentator, to push her odious far right views and those of her close associates in the Brexit Party And so they should! The minute you start censoring what people can say and what people can hear you have lost. I would allow Farage and even Tommy Robinson to have their say provided they stay within the law. It does not matter whether they are a 'recognised' political party or not. There is no requirement for a party to have a manifesto or formal membership. It's not even a requirement to register a political movement as a party. Just as anyone can put themselves forward for election as an independent so can a loose affiliation of like minded people. I vehemently disagree with their message but the right of free speech is being eroded at an alarming rate. Who gets to decide who can speak and who can't? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? 55 minutes ago, DJ360 said: So, she gets introduced as ''Journalist and Writer', with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party. Really Col? 55 minutes ago, DJ360 said: Far too much of the BBC reporting of current affairs goes. " Government today said 'A'.. Opposition pointed out 'B', but Government insisted 'A'" and there it ends.. no analysis, no real question..no holding to account.. just a pointless commentary. What's wrong with that? They are reporting the news of the day without commentary and allowing us to make our own minds up. How can they give an analysis without accusations of bias? It can't be done. I said before the Beeb is between a rock and a hard place and simply can't win. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
radfordred 6,278 Posted November 21, 2019 Report Share Posted November 21, 2019 On 11/20/2019 at 11:53 AM, Gem said: but I then read the comment made by RR and that was not funny and the sad part it is so true. Time to take our country back, have some pride & crack a few skulls on the way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.