aintforever

Corbyn has been crystal clear in being against antisemitism, not sure why people think it's his fault that a few nobheads in Labour have been talking ******. I can see why many on the left despise Israel though, their treatment of Palestinians has bordered on inhuman, plus their links to the USA is also going to be a factor.

Wasn't it the Liverpool supporters who blamed lack of fencing for the Heysel tragedy a few years before Hillsborough? The blame of Hillsborough lies with the Police because whatever the type of people going - it was their job to ensure supporter safety. But the way football was going in the 80's (violence, old stadiums etc) probably made a tragedy like Hillsborough inevitable. It could have been us or any other set of fans, it was just bad luck on Liverpool. But the behaviour of supporters in the 80's day did play a part. I remember hearing the news filter through on the radio (I think we were away at West Ham, might be wrong), at first it was "crowd trouble at Hillsborough" and most people's first reaction was to assume it was hooliganism that caused it "not those ****ing scousers again" - until the facts became clear. I expect the Police at the time absolutely hated football fans (along with much of the UK population) because of the minority of idiots who thought it big and clever to beat people up because of the team they support. Idiots who think they have some sort of right to get ****ed up, cause all sorts of havoc and expect the Police to clear their **** up and keep everyone safe at the same time. I'm not surprised in the Police's siege mentality and cover-up at all.

Yes but Police are human, and humans will always make mistakes. 6ft high fences with spikes on the top are an obvious potential hazard - and they were only there because of the behaviour of some football fans.

I'm not obsessed at all just think that the behaviour of some fans in the 80's was disgraceful and people should be responsible for their actions. It's easy to blame the police but fact is football fans were herded around and treated like animals because many acted like animals.

Sums up my opinion of it all. Any police that lied or covered up should be prosecuted but the events on the day were just an unfortunate tragedy with many contributing factors, the Police didn't mean to kill anyone. If the police had not ****ed up the 96 would still be alive, but also if so many football fans in the 1980's were not such violent ****s there would have been no fences and the the 96 would still be alive. If the police didn't think the Liverpool and Forest fans would try to kick the sh!t out of each other there would have been more turnstiles open and maybe there wouldn't have been a need to open a gate.

I except the findings of the inquest and that the Police are to blame but I think you have to put the whole thing in the context of the day. The fences were there because of the awful behaviour of some football fans during the 80s, the police's main concern at the time was probably to stop ****ed up idiots fighting each other. The police's attitude was shaped by the fact that they spend most of their time fighting with and clearing up the mess left by football hooligans. These are all factors which contributed to the awful tragedy IMO.

You are ignoring the fact that we know we are pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. We know it, we can measure it, and we know it absorbs more heat.

Legally that was the only conclusion they could reach but I still think the behaviour of football supporters at the time in general played a part. Fact is, if so many fans in the 80s were not ****s (Liverpool had more than most) then the fences would not have been there and the police would have been more concerned with safety rather than keeping two lots of idiots apart.

That's why I'm voting to leave, don't really give a flying **** what big business think is good for them.

I have no idea what the laws on child neglect in Portugal are but it's not odd in the slightest that they haven't been charged, it would hardly be in the public interest of a town reliant on tourism. As for keeping the investigation open to keep the heat away from themselves - that makes no sense at all. It was years ago, there would be no heat, any heat/publicity/interest would have ended years ago if it were not for their efforts.

Oh come on, he obviously has major issues with the criticism their police force got so the book was just a way of hitting back. Plus it was a no lose gamble money wise, I doubt some fat, useless ex cop in Portugal has many other ways of potentially making a large sum of money (if he did). There are some oddities surrounding the McCann case but the idea that they killed her and somehow disposed of the body is just fantasy. The fact that they have actively been raising money to keep it high-profile for years and actually got the Police to keep investigating the case goes against any idea that they did it.

They may not have been 100% honest but the idea that they killed her is just bonkers.

Oh come on, it doesn't matter which way you vote, the British public in general are not the brightest bunch - how else do you explain Tony Blair getting re-elected after an illegal war, the Sun being the best selling paper, or the X factor? My point about the leaflet is because it has the HM Government logo on it and it is designed like an information leaflet - it will work in that it will persuade some people to vote in. I have studied and worked in advertising/design for over 25 years and I'm pretty sure this dishonest, underhand approach will work better than if they had produced a leaflet with the Britain Stronger In logo on (which in my opinion is what they should have done) so people could recognise it as propaganda and not think they are just reading the facts of the issue. Britain will vote to stay in anyway, it won't even be close.

Except next to nothing has been reformed. And I still don't think it's right that they spend tax payers money on propaganda leaflets in the guise of sending out a government factual leaflet.

So Iain Duncan Smith, Michael Gove, Chris Grayling, Theresa Villiers, John Whittingdale are not part of the government then?

Who are "The government" then if it is not the current elected MPs? Surely to be factually correct the leaflet should have stated "some people within the government think..." because who what I can see a large part of the government want to leave the EU.

It's what it implies that is wrong. It is designed as if it is an official document giving us the necessary information when it is just propaganda aimed at misleading. I am amazed that a government is allowed to be so biased in a referendum like this. The whole point in a refurendum is to let the people not the MPs decide. Also how can a leaflet say "the government thinks this and that" when most of the Tory party, the party elected by us, are anti EU? This leaflet will probably work though, the British public in the main are ****ing stupid so won't see this leaflet for what it is.

You clearly have problems reading, I don't agree with what either of them have done.

Don't agree with that either

The 200 grand pressie from his mum avoided any inheritance tax from his daddies estate. Not crime of the century but but a bit hypocritical given his pretend outrage at other people's tax avoidance. Plus these offshore things are always dodgy, remember the only reason we know anything at all about this one is because information was leaked and he had to say something, god knows what else his family has squirrelled away. These things are always too clever to leave a paper trail to anything illegal but it's the sneaky, greedy nature of it I don't like given his position.

He hasn’t done anything illegal (from what we know) but wether what he done is wrong or not is obviously a matter of opinion. Personally, I’m not a big fan of tax avoidance, I don’t get why people with such vast amounts of money go through so much trouble to keep a bit more - I guess greed is the new norm. I just find it very sad. I think the Prime Minister should be setting an example to the rest of the UK so going out of his way to avoid paying tax is not a great example. It is particularly galling in Cameron’s case because: 1. He’s personally been responsible for cutting public services and benefits for the disabled using lack of public funds as a reason/excuse. 2. He has gained political capital by pretending to be against tax avoidance. Plenty wrong IMO.

It's a good job they are getting tough, I hope they get tougher. Many of my mates have small businesses and they have a million and one ways of getting out of paying tax, most of them run rings round the tax man.

How many times has he changed his story now? Only yesterday he said he hadn't benefitted from offshore funds.

Surely in the interests of democracy the only fair thing to do would be to give the out campaign the same amount? I thought the purpose of a referendum was to gauge public opinion, not just a vehicle to get the public to do what the government want you to do.

It's all irrelevant, we all work and pay tax (except the obvious scrounges). If you work your ass off in some low paid salaried job you don't get the option of squirrelling it away in an offshore scheme and you sure as **** put a higher percentage of what you earn back into the economy.