Bob Diamond resigns

[wilts rover]

Wolfie, I think you are casting your grain on stoney ground there mate. It was due to the ruling classes having the same attitude as Mick that caused the suffragettes to have to organise in the first place (if Emily Davidson intended to throw herself under the horse why did she buy a return ticket?) - the French and Russian revolutions, Hitler to come to power - in fact he reminds me of a Greek autocrat who has tried to pay as little tax as possible and caused the destruction of that economy. Social issues dont matter only economics. Is that the attitude that brings countries together into recovery - nah its the attitude that starts riots & revolutions.

A benavolant dictator......hanging on a rope like Mussolini.

[jucyberry]

So, what happnes if you have a stroke that affects your ability to write your name?

What happens if you have an accident and have a head injury that causes you to lose this basic function...

What happens if you come home from war badly injured perhaps brain damaged.. According to you and your blanket distain for people who for one reason or another cannot sign their name should give up their right to make their mark.
You might say I'm being simplistic in the extreme, but isn't that just what you are being by saying that?

[mjdgreg]

You might say I'm being simplistic in the extreme

Yes I would.

[mjdgreg]

According to you and your blanket distain for people who for one reason or another cannot sign their name should give up their right to make their mark.

I said spell not sign. As you cannot read properly I'm afraid you have also just lost the vote.

[Donnywolf]

According to you and your blanket distain for people who for one reason or another cannot sign their name should give up their right to make their mark.

I said spell not sign. As you cannot read properly I'm afraid you have also just lost the vote.

Tell that to Ben Parkinson ... who has lost his legs and other body parts to provide Afghanis with a vote each.

[Donnywolf]

Wolfie, I think you are casting your grain on stoney ground there mate. It was due to the ruling classes having the same attitude as Mick that caused the suffragettes to have to organise in the first place (if Emily Davidson intended to throw herself under the horse why did she buy a return ticket?) - the French and Russian revolutions, Hitler to come to power - in fact he reminds me of a Greek autocrat who has tried to pay as little tax as possible and caused the destruction of that economy. Social issues dont matter only economics. Is that the attitude that brings countries together into recovery - nah its the attitude that starts riots & revolutions.

A benavolant dictator......hanging on a rope like Mussolini.

Yes but he wont answer that one ... just be very selective with other posts

 

[mjdgreg]

Yes but he wont answer that one ... just be very selective with other posts

I've no idea why she bought a return ticket. If I knew, I would answer the only question posed in Wilts Rovers post. Beats me why you want me to answer that question anyway. There's probably only one person that could answer that and she killed herself.

If you would like to explain your comment ' just be very selective with other posts' I would be more than happy to oblige. If there are any parts of any posts you need further enlightenment on then just let me know. I pride myself on answering any question thrown at me (unlike some on here). For example, I'm still waiting for Filo to show where I've contradicted myself in nearly every post.

[mjdgreg]

Tell that to Ben Parkinson ... who has lost his legs and other body parts to provide Afghanis with a vote each.

You've lost me (and I suspect everybody else on this message board). If you think brave lads like Ben were sent to Afghanistan to provide the indigenous population with a vote each then I'm afraid you've been smoking too much wacky baccy.

[Donnywolf]

Tell that to Ben Parkinson ... who has lost his legs and other body parts to provide Afghanis with a vote each.

You've lost me (and I suspect everybody else on this message board). If you think brave lads like Ben were sent to Afghanistan to provide the indigenous population with a vote each then I'm afraid you've been smoking too much wacky baccy.

I have cut this directly and without alteration from my post only a few posts above. I was replying to your idea that seemed to suggest politically unaware voters should not be allowed to vote ! Please feel free to go back and read your initial post and then my FULL reply


We live in a Democracy. We have free speech.  People fought and died for the right to vote. One could argue they are still fighting or dying to bring Democracy** to peoples of other countries.

** (Aside : you could argue the USA and us have altogether different agendas)

[mjdgreg]

So are you saying that anyone who is 18 and can breathe should be given the vote? Way too simplistic in my view. There are far too many clueless people out there that can inflict major damage on the country if that policy is followed. It needs to change.

All you have to do is look at every Labour government's legacy. They always leave the country in a financial mess. By and large it is the clueless amongst us that keep on voting for the incompetent fools. Until people are restricted from voting if they are clueless then the same old sorry state of affairs will continue.

Also democracy is a very flawed system. How would you feel if one day the Muslims outnumbered all the other faiths in this country? Would you then be happy for us to become a Muslim state just because they were the majority? What about Afghanistan? What if there is an election and the Taliban get into power because they are the majority? I thought we were supposed to be fighting the Taliban. That's how democracy can work and it is not for me. I'm not holding my breath for a sensible answer.

[Donnywolf]

Hold your breath no longer. I have given you several (ino) intelligent answers. I dare say others have done the same during your debate on Bob Diamond which I have declined to read

You are obviously an intelligent chap , eloquent , diligent , fastidious in your views BUT I cannot equate that intelligence and rationale with the issue you have "moved" this thread towards and your opinion that you should have a vote worth 1000 votes is just TOTALLY IRRATIONAL when judged against your overall persona and its views

I repeat (for the final time as I will not post another word on this thread) - We have as individuals and as a Nation fought for democracy both at home and abroad with the basic premise of one man one vote and I think it is an affront to all those who have "fought" either actively or passively to suggest some of the limitations you wish to apply are valid

Goodbye 

[Filo]

Mick you`re Aiden Burley are n`t you?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/london-2012/9434123/London-2012-Nazi-stag-party-MP-Aidan-Burley-attacks-multicultural-Opening-Ceremony.html

[mjdgreg]

I don't watch such drivel. Sounds to me though from what I've heard it was a load of leftie rubbish. Especially the bit on the NHS. Our healthcare system is an excellent example of how to waste a vast amount of taxpayer's money.

[MachoMadness]

[mjdgreg]

As Donnywolf has avoided the question I'll throw it out to anyone who supports democracy to answer it. If the Muslims win the biggest share of the vote in this country at some point in the future, would you be happy for them to turn the country into a Muslim state?

Another question. What if the Catholics eventually outnumber the Protestants in Northern Ireland to such a point that they decide they want to become part of Southern Ireland again. Do you let that happen? What happens to the Protestants? Do we ship them all back to the UK?

[RedJ]

On the question of Northern Ireland, I'm pretty sure our position is we keep it until the majority want out (same goes for the Falklands).

But then I'm just a thick Kitson lefty aren't I.

[mjdgreg]

On the question of Northern Ireland, I'm pretty sure our position is we keep it until the majority want out (same goes for the Falklands).

So all the Catholics have to do is breed faster than the Protestants and they can then get their wish to become part of a united Ireland. Hardly seems fair on the Protestants. Great system this democracy lark.

[mjdgreg]

On the question of Northern Ireland, I'm pretty sure our position is we keep it until the majority want out (same goes for the Falklands).

Out of interest why did you avoid the Muslim question?

[mjdgreg]

But then I'm just a thick c*** lefty aren't I.

If you say so. I do think you are being a bit harsh on yourself though, but I do admire your honesty.

[RedJ]

Thing is, not all Catholics are nationalist and not all Protestants are unionist. Not that simple.

I avoided that for no particular reason, I just felt better qualified to answer the one on NI (or rather underqualified for the former). I don't know and I don't think I would know until it came to it.

It isn't if I say so, I'm perfectly aware that you seem to feel yourself to be superior.

[mjdgreg]

Thing is, not all Catholics are nationalist and not all Protestants are unionist. Not that simple

Good answer. In fact more Catholics would now prefer to stay part of the UK than join the Republic of Ireland. They've copped themselves on and want nothing to do with the Euro. It could also have something to do with England subsidising them to the tune of over £6bn every year. They are taking us for mugs. Northern Ireland is the most subsidised region in the world. No wonder they want to keep on taking our money.

[mjdgreg]

I avoided that for no particular reason, I just felt better qualified to answer the one on NI (or rather underqualified for the former). I don't know and I don't think I would know until it came to it.

It would be too late by then. I'll take the bull by the horns and tell you what I think. There is no way on this Earth that the Muslims should be allowed to become the largest religion in this country. This must be avoided at all costs. Even if it means democracy suffers. If I had my way all religions would be banned and there would be no faith schools. If you didn't like it, tough. Go and live somewhere else where they still believe in the fantasy of some kind of God.

[mjdgreg]

It isn't if I say so, I'm perfectly aware that you seem to feel yourself to be superior.

I'm sorry if you feel this way. I prefer to think of myself as very self confident and I have a pugnacious, take no prisoners debating style. Some find this intimidating but I find it stimulates a more honest, interesting debate. I find myself getting more confident in my views as time goes on as I've yet to be proved wrong on anything. As soon as anyone does manage to achieve this feat I will be the first to admit it.

[RedJ]

I half agree with you there. I don't think the state should 'push' any faith - in fact, it should be totally secular, as it ever increasingly is - but I don't think it should be banned.

[mjdgreg]

I don't think the state should 'push' any faith - in fact, it should be totally secular

I could live with that.

[wilts rover]

Having a state without religion is impossible. All religion is at heart is a set of values and lifestyle choices/commandments/laws. A fully secular state has those - in fact it generally tends to replace the religious leader icon with a secular one, Hitler/Lenin/Pol Pot being three most extreme examples. In fact in your posts mgreg - haven't you proposed impossing yourself as our great dictator? Anyway dont you fully support the immigration of Catholic-EU employees into England thus perpetuating the religious dominance in this country?

[mjdgreg]

Having a state without religion is impossible.

Wrong. If I were in charge I could make it happen. Anyone who wanted to follow their religion would be given a grant to go to another country of their choosing and would not be allowed back in unless they became an atheist.

[mjdgreg]

Anyway dont you fully support the immigration of Catholic-EU employees into England thus perpetuating the religious dominance in this country?

I don't support immigration into our over-crowded island. If I was in charge there would be an immediate withdrawal from the EU and the repatriation of foreigners would start in earnest. When I say 'British jobs for British workers' I mean it, unlike Gordon Brown who said one thing and did completely the opposite.

 

[wilts rover]

Anyway dont you fully support the immigration of Catholic-EU employees into England thus perpetuating the religious dominance in this country?

I don't support immigration into our over-crowded island. If I was in charge there would be an immediate withdrawal from the EU and the repatriation of foreigners would start in earnest. When I say 'British jobs for British workers' I mean it, unlike Gordon Brown who said one thing and did completely the opposite.

 

Somewhere among the myriad of argumentative dross that you post you say how you prefer to recruit Polish workers rather than British. How far back are you going with the repatriations? 1, 2, 5 generations. The stone-age? Most of the England cricket team? The Sky TdF squad? Three-quarters of the PL? The Gurkhas? All the descendents of those 'foreign personel who served for us during WW2? Where are you going to build the gas chambers?

[mjdgreg]

Somewhere among the myriad of beautifully crafted prose that you post you say how you prefer to recruit Polish workers rather than British.

No I didn't. I have never recruited a Polish worker. I do believe though that in a lot of instances they make much better recruits than the indigenous population.