pap

I had a 360 within a month of launch, and was very happy with that level of service. I'm not too keen on the XBOX ONE ( already dubbed the "XBone" by internet wags ) this time around. I really don't like the idea of an always on camera, nor the idea that your console might charge you money for extra licences in the scenario you describe. The pre-owned thing doesn't bother me personally as much as it might, but I think if I go for anything this year, it'll be the PS4. We already have the Wii U in the house. It'll be fine, but it'll be collecting dust until Nintendo bring their real big hitters to it.

I'm not going to bother to respond to all of this, simply because so many of the observations you've made are based on your own assumptions and experiences from your own increasingly well catalogued life. Mine are made based on a video I found last week. Oddly enough, the vid itself is more concerned with defeating any divide and rule agenda. Seek; go find (link). I'm not sure that image/video compression is applicable here.

Joining the PC gaming revolution, Col?

I've still got some serious concerns about Woolwich which haven't been assuaged in the days since, and in some cases, further justified. I put two things in conflict; an eyewitness account describing a bloody attack, and a perpetrator that appears to have no blood on his clothing. Since then, I've uncovered the same video with the same bloke, this time, with no blood on his hands either. I can't give you the theory of everything, but I can prove that the pictures you saw on the front pages were altered to show bloody hands which just weren't there.

I think sir will find, if he checks the post history, I do very little ranting in those situations, unless I'm returning some sh!t flung my way. Most of it is directed at me, and I'm sure that some posters think it's just the accolade of attention that I'm seeking. Don't care if you believe me or not, but that's really not the case. The biggest difference between myself and most other people is perhaps the starting position we take. I don't assume the government wants the best for us, and with ample justification. Take your pick; Maggie's slash and burn attitude to industry and the North, Major's entry into what would become the EU, Blair's war crimes, Labour's ridiculous idea that it could out-left the Conservatives by importing Eastern Europeans to the UK seven years ahead of time. On your very last point, about my sometimes sensible postings being utterly whacked out by my conspiracist rantings, I'll just say this. I don't come on here giving it the "we're all ruled by lizards" beans. I'm happy to be corrected, but most of the stuff I've posted refers to basic problems between physical evidence and the things that are claimed to have transpired. I think the main problem with my input is that people aren't too keen on hearing it at the time, and on reflection, I probably should have waited for cooler heads to prevail before questioning the Woolwich incident. Lesson learned? Possibly, but I stand firmer behind the evidence than I did then. I'm not trying to convert anyone here. I couldn't conjure a coherent ideology if I tried ( and believe me, I have ). That said, if one person runs a news story through a bullsh!t filter because of something I've said, I'll be a happy man.

And if so, which one and why.

The Evertonians are already reminding people that he turned down a job at their neighbours last year. They'll love him for that, at least. Still quite a bit of general uncertainty about the fella, both on this thread, on the podcasts I listen to and my Everton supporting mates.

I was having a similar conversation with the missus in the car. She reached for the typical example of a single mum milking the system to work her way up the registered social landlord property ladder. If that's everybody, then fine, you have a point. Life tends to be a bit more complicated than that. I'll ask you the same question I asked her. How well would the system treat a mother of four who went into marriage in good faith, discovered that she was in an abusive relationship, then had the courage to walk out? The answers aren't so easy then, but if previous policy is anything to go by, all of these cuts will be crude implements that bash far more than the intended targets. Your second point is a bit of a laugh, once you strip away the obvious dig. You may think we have nothing to worry about, but I suspect you're not really paying attention. The two pieces of legislation discussed here are disproportionate enough on their own merits. Labour did one better during their time in office, nestling a ready-made Enabling Act into the body of our legislation. If these things aren't matters of concern, then you've obviously never read up on the nascent stages of any dictatorship. Enemies of the state are identified, those inconvenient laws are streamlined or circumvented entirely with other laws that slip into being after major atrocities. You're free to call me whatever you like, Smirkers. We still live in a free country, and any charge of us currently being a police state is well wide of the mark, even if we have a lot of the apparatus in place. What you can't deny is that every time a terrorist atrocity has taken place, it has been our own governments, and not the terrorists, that have clamped down on our freedoms.

Ah yes, South Asia. Silly me. You may be able to help me with a further issue. I take it by Zawahiri, you mean bin Laden's former right hand man, one time leader of the Islamic Group of Egypt. You're right. Dangerous bunch. Why do you think they were allowed to operate out of London?

Mate, don't feel bad. There was a time when you had a great deal of my attention. Now you have little. Strong men adapt, Bazza. Strong men adapt.

Your consistency skills are weak, old man.

Nah, I just can't be arsed arguing with you about it anymore. Surprised you still are, actually.

The welfare restrictions are being resurrected on the basis that the security and police services don't have enough money, so the government will find £3Bn from the welfare bill to give it to them. Woolwich is being used as the justification.

Not suggesting you talk exclusively to a person in Oldham, but it seems to be what you want.... Not on its own, no. I think the UK needs an independent foreign policy and should be a strong, critical voice in world affairs. If we still keep backing Israel no matter what, that has consequences, as do our "adventures" with our American friends. Still, keep supporting the EDL, mate. It's what Labour party members do, after all...

So your solution to solving the problems of racial harmony is to ignore half a country? When speaking to these disenfranchised people, how quickly do you think you'll travel off the subject of how Islamic extremism is affecting the UK and onto general gripes about immigration? I'll give you ten minutes, if that. I'm sure that the leaders of the EDL would disagree, but their organisation is a trojan horse, dressed in concern about Islamic extremism, but actually just against immigration in general. I've said before; if they were serious and specific about ending Islamic extremism in the UK, they'd be petitioning the Government to get out of the Middle East. Happy to have my ignorant southern views proved wrong, but I doubt you'd discover much on Islamic extremism from an EDL supporter in Oldham.

Same reason they under-report every demo. They do not want people to know the scale of the dissent.

I'm not a huge fan of plagiarism, Bazza - so when I've been informed by another's opinion, I only feel its right to credit the source. It also so happens that his expressed experience corresponds with my own. You seem to have a lot to say on the issue. How would you address the issues you claim are there?

Bill Hicks used to do a very good bit in his act contrasting the horror of the news with the day-to-day reality of life. If my assessment of the world was based entirely on news reports, then I'd consider the world to be a pretty depressing place. Fortunately, in addition to seeing what is reported out there, I also get to live my own life, which has proven to be blissfully uneventful. Even filler items on regional news shows have more going on. You ask whether the great experiment of multiculturalism has worked. Judging by the recent racist outrage on social networks over the Woolwich, someone might agree with your position. Taking a slightly longer view, I look at a country which has accommodated waves of immigrants, adapted and changed. Woolwich excepted, we are not killing each other in the streets. This is still a civilised country and as someone who has been to other places made up of different cultures, we handle it a lot better than most. You're looking at one or two exceptional examples to prove that multiculturalism doesn't work. The day to day reality is thankfully, a much less scarier place.

Before I engage in any further discussion of this point, I'd like to know what it is you mean by "has not worked".

And you can still play them when you get a new PC. And they're better when you do!

They like to have a couple of Sikhs around to make it look good. Sikh's weren't too happy about that. http://www.turbancampaign.com/updates/sikh-community-issues-ultimatum-to-guramit-singh-denounce-edl-by-vaisakhi-or-face-excommunication/ Guramit Singh, former poster child for EDL's inclusiveness, ended up leaving a couple of months after the above ultimatum. http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/12859

As knee-jerk, last minute additions, these bills will get nothing like the Parliamentary scrutiny they deserve. The political steak tenderiser is already going after the Lib Dems on this:- “The Liberal Democrats will block it — and it will be for them to explain why it is more important for teenagers to be given council flats rather than for the nation and its citizens to be protected.” As for the snooper's charter, it's a load of crap, and I hope that Labour leave it alone. Problem is, they've actually got worse form than the Tories for passing draconian legislation.

Two major course corrections for Parliament are on the cards. Both are a direct result of the Woolwich attacks last week. 1) Revival of the Internet snoopers bill http://rt.com/news/woolwich-snoopers-charter-murder-811/ 2) £3Bn diverted from Welfare Bill to bolster security services http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10083049/Iain-Duncan-Smith-cut-welfare-to-fund-police-and-Forces.html This one is particularly cynical; cost-savings measures like no housing benefits for under 25s and limitation of state payments to families with more than two children. These plans were shelved previously, but are now back on the agenda. Does one exceptional event justify this sort of legislation?

Again, doing what the EDL do - widening the argument to all of Islam to make some semblance of a point. I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make. Muslim countries have wars, so they are evil? If we start admitting countries to the axis of evil on that basis, it'll be a big club. I happen to agree with you that the incident in Mumbai was shocking, a true indication of the devastation that can be achieved when people are determined to go down fighting. I don't think we have to entertain similar worries here.

Ah quiet. You said multiculturalism had never hit Southampton, so it very much does look like you were referring to Southampton. What have I missed here?