UK Politics

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

to be honest, i've not known of any school, in my experience, that hasn't had compulsory uniform, in some form or other, although ties as part of the uniform is getting rare (praise be), i never wore a tie at school (praise be), my uniform was just black jeans, black jumper, white tee shirt, quite a liberal school (praise be)

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

to be honest, i've not known of any school, in my experience, that hasn't had compulsory uniform, in some form or other, although ties as part of the uniform is getting rare (praise be), i never wore a tie at school (praise be), my uniform was just black jeans, black jumper, white tee shirt, quite a liberal school (praise be)

Here it's different. Students now just go to school however they want pretty much - although schools have been getting tough on thongs and boxers showing, tanktops and stomachs showing. But basically now - everyone feels they should be able to wear whatever they want pretty much. There should be some dress standard I feel. It doesn't have to be tie and jacket, but some standard in school.

[Janny]

Just as well you picked R&J... I'd only get that or McBeth.

My worry is primarily that I can't find reference to her saying she wanted compensation...
But secondly, if I did read this, then surely she is discrediting her own religion?

EDIT: She is applying for compensation. And I think it's dangerous and immature of her. She spoke for so long about how she and other Muslims are being abused in our 'post 911 society'. Then why make it look like Muslims are not genuine about their religion? Why make it look like her motive was not a religious one to maintain her dignity, but rather a graspy monetary one?

[Janny]

Three cheers for The White House and what she is not doing tomorrow.

[Rían]

what is she not doing tomorrow?

[Janny]

Meeting Sinn Fein representatives.

[sun-star]

It is indeed to be applauded, but I don't see why the White House should get the credit. Surely your cheers should be for the women who have brought this situation about, not the politicians who belatedly respond to it.

[Durin1]

Why do you think it should be applauded? All of a sudden Bush et al want to take the moral high-ground.

[Janny]

Originally Posted by Durin1

Why do you think it should be applauded? All of a sudden Bush et al want to take the moral high-ground.

All of a sudden? Wasn't this whole removing an evil dictator thing taking the moral high ground? You don't have to agree it was right, but at the very, very least, the most cynical person has to conceed they were trying to make it look like they were doing the right thing.

Sunny, yes, of course the women are the heroins here...

However, I'm sure you'll agree that it is much better that the White House does snub them rather than welcome them with open arms and pretend they didn't act in the way they did.

[Durin1]

Sorry, when i said "all of a sudden" i was speaking about this particular issue. Don't get me started on Bush's morality, or his concept of it!

However, it seems odd to me that the political leaders of Sinn Fein would have wanted these turn of events to have happened - against their own people. True, there are rogue elements within the IRA, but condemn a whole party for it? That just seems detrimental in my eyes.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

indeed, durin, t'will create ever more problems,

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by Durin1

Why do you think it should be applauded? All of a sudden Bush et al want to take the moral high-ground.

On the general rule of better late than never. Sure, maybe they've only just figured out that terrorism is still terrorism when it's not Americans being killed - but it's better to do the right thing eventually than to go on being inconsistent.

True, there are rogue elements within the IRA, but condemn a whole party for it? That just seems detrimental in my eyes.

I think (I hope) you mean "within Sinn Fein". There's a difference, or so they'd have us believe.

Originally Posted by Chrys

indeed, durin, t'will create ever more problems,

Such as...?

[Durin1]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Rogue elements within the IRA? Where, in your opinion, are the non-rogue elements in this collection of murderers and terrorists?

You're looking at the past. Sure, the IRA did some pretty heinous things, however, history will show that since the Good Friday agreement, there have been more peaceful means that the IRA have pursued; working more closely with Sinn Fein to ensure a peaceful resolution.

However, any organisation will have undesirables in it who prevent peaceful negotiations. This is what I mean by rogue elements. They have made Sinn Fein's job are lot more difficult as a result.

I object to your wording: "this collection of murderers and terrorists". That is a very generalised, and in my opinion, narrow-minded view to take.

These are a people who want to belong to a United Ireland. They (and their sympathisers) will probably call themselves freedom fighters.

I don't condone any actions that resort to violence or death, however, it should also be understood that these people are fighting against years of suppression and persecution that they themselves received by a country looking to retain its last vestiges of Empire. It should not be forgotten that the loyalists weren't exactly pure as the driven snow, either.

[sun-star]

"NB: I edited my post while Durin1 was replying*

Originally Posted by Durin1

You're looking at the past. Sure, the IRA did some pretty heinous things, however, history will show that since the Good Friday agreement, there have been more peaceful means that the IRA have pursued; working more closely with Sinn Fein to ensure a peaceful resolution.

Why haven't they disarmed, in that case?

I object to your wording: "this collection of murderers and terrorists". That is a very generalised, and in my opinion, narrow-minded view to take.

These are a people who want to belong to a United Ireland. They (and their sympathisers) will probably call themselves freedom fighters.

There are many people who want to belong to a united Ireland yet don't make their case by violence and intimidation. That is not the way to bring about political change, which is why I think it's wrong to undermine the efforts made by republicans and loyalists who want a peaceful solution by making excuses for the IRA. I have no problem with being narrow-minded about the IRA - I may have sympathy for their views, but never for their actions.

I don't condone any actions that resort to violence or death, however, it should also be understood that these people are fighting against years of suppression and persecution that they themselves received by a country looking to retain its last vestiges of Empire. It should not be forgotten that the loyalists weren't exactly pure as the driven snow, either.

Of course not - quite the opposite. But I don't think that terrorism can be justified at all, by suppression or any other reason.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Janny

Sunny, yes, of course the women are the heroins here...

Ah, what dropping one letter will do ... *looks for needle tracks*

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Such as...?

every time anyone tries to condemn sinn fein/ira there are always reprisal attacks
of course, if britain had left ireland as one nation none of this would even be a problem

[sun-star]

Of course, but it's a bit late for that now

[The Gaffer]

So anyway, we're on for 5th May Election. What do you all think?

Personally, I'm struggling between voting Labour to keep the Tories out, and voting Lib Dem because of my moral opposition to the war. My guess is that a lot of natural Labour supporters are in a similar position, and we'll see plenty of scary "if Howard were elected" type scenarios run past us in the coming weeks.

An interesting comparison of policies on the BBC web site; barely a rizla between Labour and Tory. Which is another reason to vote Lib Dem.

But then again, they're pretty woolly in the old policy department.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

whilst the lib dems are the best of the top three, my vote is either green or LCA at the moment, certainly would never go blue or red, hmm, mister hand gestures or the lord of the undead

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

mister hand gestures

Is that a subtle way of calling him a wanker?

Hey what do you think about the increasingly well-documented mental health risks of cannabis? Ironic that just as they're beginning to liberalise the law, along comes a bunch of research that says it's harmful:
- it seems to increase risk of relapse in people with schizophrenic disorders
- amongst young adults with other risk factors, it seems to increase the risk of schizophrenic disorders in adulthood
- it leads to use of another, more harmful drug: i.e. tobacco

EDIT: Whoops, forgot the all-important: