Let the buggers starve then or eat vegetarian meals.
-
NEXT GAME:Leicester City FC
Saturday 4th May 2024
Kick off 12.30 pm
Kingpower Stadium
Championship
That makes good reading for a change. I've said many times that halal should be banned in this country along with the Burqa, hijab etc and that burials forbidden with cremation being the only option. Making our country less appealing to the followers of Islam can only be a good thing.
From the Telegraph
Abdul Qureshi, acting CEO of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, was advocating children boycott their school lunches if the vote went against him. He told The Telegraph: “[The RSPCA’s guidance] is most of the time based on feelings, it's not scientifically conclusive.”
The RSPCA hit back at his claims. A spokesperson told The Telegraph: “ I utterly, completely refuse to cede that's where our views come from. Ourselves, the British Veterinary Association and the Humane Slaughter Association signed a joint statement saying the only humane way to kill an animal is to stun it. There is countless scientific evidence showing that when an animal has its neck cut it feels quite considerable pain. The farm animal welfare council is of the opinion that the only humane way to kill an animal to stun it. You take New Zealand - everything is pre-stunned there, and it's all Halal, it's exported to countries in the Middle East and they all accept that it is Halal.
We, for animal welfare reasons, would be quite happy if unstunned meat was banned across the UK.”
What a bloody cheek by that odious individual Abdul Qureshi when he criticises the RSPCA's guidance for being based on feelings and not scientific fact. What sort of adherence to scientific fact does the backward religion of Islam ever practice?
From the Telegraph
Abdul Qureshi, acting CEO of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, was advocating children boycott their school lunches if the vote went against him. He told The Telegraph: “[The RSPCA’s guidance] is most of the time based on feelings, it's not scientifically conclusive.”
The RSPCA hit back at his claims. A spokesperson told The Telegraph: “ I utterly, completely refuse to cede that's where our views come from. Ourselves, the British Veterinary Association and the Humane Slaughter Association signed a joint statement saying the only humane way to kill an animal is to stun it. There is countless scientific evidence showing that when an animal has its neck cut it feels quite considerable pain. The farm animal welfare council is of the opinion that the only humane way to kill an animal to stun it. You take New Zealand - everything is pre-stunned there, and it's all Halal, it's exported to countries in the Middle East and they all accept that it is Halal.
We, for animal welfare reasons, would be quite happy if unstunned meat was banned across the UK.”
What a bloody cheek by that odious individual Abdul Qureshi when he criticises the RSPCA's guidance for being based on feelings and not scientific fact. What sort of adherence to scientific fact does the backward religion of Islam ever practice?
Last edited:
blueandwhitehalves
Senior Member
"Eighty-four per cent of halal meat in the country is currently stunned. Also, in New Zealand, all their lamb is stunned, and Saudi Arabia buys New Zealand lamb. If Saudis can eat stunned meat, I don't see why people in Lancashire can't."
That sums it up. The Lancashire Council of Mosques isn't kicking up a fuss about stunned halal meat, its kicking up a fuss about the concept of a primarily non-Muslim body interfering with anything Islamic.
That sums it up. The Lancashire Council of Mosques isn't kicking up a fuss about stunned halal meat, its kicking up a fuss about the concept of a primarily non-Muslim body interfering with anything Islamic.
No school dinners .... no school.
Oh and btw ALL girls wear official school uniform including skirts! I recall a huge row between muslim immigrants and the Council Education Dept in Blackburn in the 70's I think when muslim immigrant girls were first allowed to wear trousers instead of skirts. Up until then skirts (and humanely slaughtered meat, and a christian Morning Assembly) had been totally accepted by the immigrant community. The initial immigrants came to work and established a home and a family, they were then permitted to bring over their elderly relatives (NHS based reasons). Those ancients came here with their silly clothes and beards and were appalled at the western values and appearance of their grandchildren and I'm pretty sure that history will reveal that that was the first signs of subversive islamic ambition and the start of the rot.
I can understand that type of argument for sure. I'm glad that debating death penalty, imprisonment, etc isn't my decision because in some cases rehabilitation is possible. While I would rather be knifed than have acid thrown on me when either goes as far as murder should the latter be considered worse or equally bad? Its still intent and that's probably how it would be seen in a court of law. I think someone who stabs another person could potentially be rehabilitated (unless its multiple victims) but not anyone throwing acid. Unless the latter is doing it as payback on someone who murdered their whole family or something. Look at Leslie Grantham for instance though my gut feeling is it was more manslaughter (struggle when the gun went off though of course the fact it was loaded didn't help his case) than outright cold blooded murder. However murder is what he was charged with could you imagine the BBC having the guts to keep him in the role today?
The death penalty in my view should only be considered in cases of 100% guilt or 99.99999999999999% or whatever exact percent DNA evidence is. Also camera footage, etc. Do I believe in alternative punishments like solitary confinement for life in some dungeon full of rats or something? I'm not so sure and while I don't want to come across as a pathetic liberal it does seem rather medieval. For those who prefer the "no mercy" approach why do you almost always suggest either "throw away the key" or the death penalty? I'm surprised that more people don't suggest carrying out medical experimentation on lifers as that would mean they serve a purpose. Even if say there had to be a bit of concession and only slightly risky trials were conducted (but far more risky than most drug trials though even then there's extreme exceptions like the infamous "elephant man" trial) meaning in all likelihood they would survive unhurt. Of course there's also the "Mindhunter" style experiments where you could just study and question serious criminals. One thing I do support 100% is examining the brains of serious criminals after death. Some argue against that but its probably based on religious nonsense or some kind of ethical thing. If they are dead they are dead its not like flushing ashes down the toilet (well OK that's still dead) which would pose more of an ethical question. Some perfectly normal people are willing to donate their brains to scientific research but I've never known of anyone asking to be cremated and their ashes flushed down the toilet.
I'm not saying that's what I would do. Can see the virtues of "keeping your humanity" arguments as well against the harshest punishments.
Last edited:
yoda
Senior Member
davebirch
Senior Member
Indeed we do.
Sorry, Steve, but something has to be done about the availability of weapons.
I know you'll bring up the fact that a citizen stopped further deaths, but 20 or so had died at that point.
I respect the right of US citizens to decide what they want, but it's becoming risky to travel to the US as you now never know when someone is going to start shooting.
Time to change, methinks.
I think laws are only any good if they can be enforced dave and with hundreds of millions of firearms scattered about the USA I believe it is an impossibility. Worse still any control (as we have seen in the UK) will only be over the law abiding citizens who just carry them for protection. The 'wrong uns' will still be able to get them relatively easily. However whilst there is a case for individuals to own a hand gun or a sporting rifle I simply cannot see any sense whatsoever in selling what are effectively assault rifles and other hi-tech weapons of war to the general public.
Also needs remembering that a gun never killed anyone without someone else holding it. Weeding out the whip tops and incarcerating them until they are proven to be stable might be a starting point.
Edit .. just noted that Trump has said similar about mental health issues. Maybe people identified at risk, including people with terminal illness, recently bereaved / divorced etc who are licensed gun owners should undergo compulsory psychiatric assessment in order that an expert might spot the danger signals. Won't be popular but at least it's a step in the right direction to avoiding disasters other than the impossible solution of attempting to unearth 300 million plus weapons.
Also needs remembering that a gun never killed anyone without someone else holding it. Weeding out the whip tops and incarcerating them until they are proven to be stable might be a starting point.
Edit .. just noted that Trump has said similar about mental health issues. Maybe people identified at risk, including people with terminal illness, recently bereaved / divorced etc who are licensed gun owners should undergo compulsory psychiatric assessment in order that an expert might spot the danger signals. Won't be popular but at least it's a step in the right direction to avoiding disasters other than the impossible solution of attempting to unearth 300 million plus weapons.
Last edited:
yoda
Senior Member
I wonder if Gunner has his mitts on any of this (the Malta bit)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5052199/Paradise-Papers-reveal-Bono-used-firm-buy-mall.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5052199/Paradise-Papers-reveal-Bono-used-firm-buy-mall.html
Tend to agree it is far too late to roll back all the guns in the USA. I've worked there a lot and the attitude of gun owners takes some getting used to. Our old IT guy was tooled up to the nines for protection at home, he had never had a break in or had there been one near his address however try to tell him he was wrong it was like taking a Child away from him. Lots of them like this, they strongly believe it is their 'right' to have arms.
What is surprising is the ease of access and the type of weapon available, walmart sold bullits and guns, bread, eggs, burgers, bullits in the shopping cart no problem.
There are also lots of people killed by guns they own, kids picking them up etc...
I doubt it will ever change.
A
ABBEY
Guest
I bet certain football agents and certain football club owners have
Lots of stuff is going to come out of the Paradise papers as it goes back years, nothing much will be done however. Apple holding over 250 billion, Lewis Hamilton and his private jet, Bono and Malta, the Queen and so on. You will find most of these celeb's will be first ones to attack austerity, and the young will be queuing up to by the new apple phone so they can launch another social media attack on a hate figure such as Trump or worse still a Tory.
I suppose in the end we would all like to pay as little tax as possible, it just grates when spouting celeb's and big companies seem to be able to route around the rules.
But apple is cool right? They must be good.
I suppose in the end we would all like to pay as little tax as possible, it just grates when spouting celeb's and big companies seem to be able to route around the rules.
But apple is cool right? They must be good.
OnlyOneTugay
Prediction Champion 2019 & 2020
Spot on . Hope you don't mind me adding Geldof to make it a triumvirate of objectionables
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/cherwell.org/2014/11/26/the-hypocrisy-of-bob-geldof/amp/
yoda
Senior Member
Oh dear, never mind Jeeza
https://order-order.com/2017/11/06/labour-rent-hq-offshore-trust/
and guess what ?
the people reporting this story are at it as well
https://www.politicalite.com/exclusive/paradise-bbc-invested-3-9bn-similar-schemes/
https://order-order.com/2017/11/06/labour-rent-hq-offshore-trust/
and guess what ?
the people reporting this story are at it as well
https://www.politicalite.com/exclusive/paradise-bbc-invested-3-9bn-similar-schemes/
Last edited:
Steve Moss
Senior Member
News flash- It is our right to have and carry arms. Please refer to the 2nd Amendment to the USA Constitution and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting it.
And I don’t care to surrender my rights because-
1. Gang bangers kill for the drug trade (at least half the murders).
2. The mentally ill get their hands on weapons (usually content to kill themselves, but not always).
3. Liberal progressives decide to become violent (there are more mass shooters who are progressive liberal, than belong to the NRA).
These loons and criminals kill innocents sometimes. If you disarm the law abiding citizens, these loons and criminals will kill more people, not less.
The most recent mass murderer was a prohibited possessor three times over (dishonorable discharge, mental illness, and conviction for domestic violence and assault). The Air Force made a mistake and did not report him to the National database.
Last edited:
A
ABBEY
Guest
would you rather no one had guns and no one got murdered ?
( I know it wont happen ..both no guns and murder worldwide )
( I know it wont happen ..both no guns and murder worldwide )
Holier than thou aren't they? Butter wouldn't melt and all that.and guess what ?
the people reporting this story are at it as well
https://www.politicalite.com/exclusive/paradise-bbc-invested-3-9bn-similar-schemes/
However fact remains I'm only small fry compared to that lot but if I found out that I was paying more tax than I need my accountant would be in hot water!
Do you believe that heads at the top will roll over that? They wouldn't here that's for sure..... Hope I'm not being insensitive now but that's unless the victims supported Liverpool perhaps.
Steve Moss
Senior Member
No. The government, as a whole, does not suffer consequences.