hypochondriac

Yep. You can bet your life this won't be repeated in future crises.

I saw a journalist slating Boris earlier because he had suggested in some WhatsApp messages that the lives of 85 year olds were worth less than others. I thought that was obvious common sense? Not that I'm any fan of Boris but that seems a weird thing to be slating him for.

It's an absurd comparison let's be honest. The idea that America is going to start throwing gays off buildings, cutting hands off or go and stab non believers because they happen to have a speaker that is probably a fundamentalist Christian and opposes gay marriage and abortion is not a serious argument. On the democrat side you've got many who support sterilisation for children and teaching them about anal sex and drag queen story hour and on the republican side you've got an obsession with guns and qanon conspiracies. Neither are correct but they can't really hold a candle to the extremes of Islam.

The history of Christianity is largely irrelevant nowadays as you say (plus loads of Christians don't have figureheads like you said so not sure that's true anyway.) I'm more concerned about the present day and how a religion impacts the world. It's undeniable that a not insignificant number interpret Islam in a manner that causes great harm to others and infringes peoples' rights. I'd certainly argue that this is to a much greater extent nowadays than all other religions so that's why I have the most problem with the ideology. I wouldn't give a toss if they just left people alone but they don't. I was shocked by how aggressive a relative of my wife was about the subject of Salman Rushdie and this is a generally mild mannered and intelligent man but Islam can and does make people act in ways that I disagree with.

Making abortions more difficult or considering marriage to be between a man and a woman isn't something I'd consider to be extremist, even if I disagree with those policies. I was talking more about making homosexuality illegal or in more extreme cases throwing them off buildings or making women the property of their husbands.

Are you suggesting that the hatred and extremism did not exist prior to this? You seem to be suggesting that this is the cause of the hatred and desire to exterminate Jews. It isn't...

I haven't seen proof of that claim. It's not like Israel haven't had the capability to kill all Palestinians and remove them from Palestine if they had wanted to.

If the Israelis are going to look to murder every Palestinian they can get their hands on and have rejected any chance for peace given the chance then fair enough.

Does the religion of peace have a problem with extremism?

I can't say I know too much about him. What rights for women and gays has he opposed?

Let's be honest though there is a difference in the handling of protests depending on who it is who is protesting. Either it's neutral or protesting is banned.

For me the major things I disagree with are the polls from attitudes of Muslims which for me is more interesting than the religion itself which can be ignored or interpreted different ways. Routinely, a significant number oppose many rights for women and gays and smaller but significant numbers show an aggressive attitude towards non Muslims which I'm uneasy about. A large number want to live under sharia too. When asked, most cite their religion for these views and that's what I oppose. If you want to pray to Allah and avoid pork then go ahead but if you're going to start oppressing others or intimidating people trying to live their lives then they can leave.

I am staying on topic the principle is the same. Who are you to brand the protestor as a few people who are hate filled? I saw enough signs and heard enough chants to understand what was going on it was shameful.

If Palestine renounced Hamas and opposed any further aggression or killings of Israelis then I'd certainly like to see that yes. The idea they will do though is fanciful.

The alternative results in more Israeli raping and beheadings now. If Palestinians want to change this cycle then the opportunity is there to call for new elections, elect someone who isn't Hamas and then call for something that isn't just wiping all Jews out. Like someone said earlier though, Hamas is the most popular party which suggests that a majority of Palestinians want this to continue.

Israel know they won't destroy Hamas, but they can cripple them and hamper their operations for a number of years. The surrounding Arab countries already want them wiped off the map.

Presume you said the same about EDL marches? They'd be the first to tell you that their marches weren't hateful.

I don't think he's that good but I'd still have him in my team. Not sure when Ross Stewart is fit though. He's clearly someone who can score some goals in this league, but he's not good enough for the prem.

Yep. Give back the hostages, give up the individuals who went into Israel to commit these crimes and publically destroy the tunnels in Gaza and let's see how long this conflict continues for. If Palestine did that then there really wouldn't be any further justification for Israel to continue. We all know they won't though. Because they want to inflict pain and suffering on Jews and wipe them out.

I also find it bizarre that some people think that Israel reacting like thjs is going to lead to more terror attacks in the future. The reality is that there will be terror attacks no matter what they do. If their reaction had been to do nothing or to suddenly decide to live in peace and harmony and lay down their arms, Hamas woukd use it as an opportunity to kill as many Jews as possible. Hamas doesn't want peace, it doesn't matter what the Israelis do. The Israeli response isn't designed to end attacks - they aren't naive - it's to hamper their ability to attack effectively for as long as possible. From the Israeli point of view, if they kill most of Hamas and destroy what they've built, it should reduce the effectiveness of their attacks for quite a number of years so I can see the attraction. Here's an old but accurate cartoon.

Maybe the Muslims based in the UK who went on the anti Israel March would elict more sympathy if they did an equivalent March which was pro Palestinian and anti Hamas. We all know why they won't though.

It wasn't pathetic in the slightest. Many many of the people on the marches are hateful that's a fact. It was disgusting to hear some of the chants and see the slogans. Imagine being Jewish and living in London right now. I went to a bar mitzvah in London a few years ago and they put bodyguards on the doors to prevent attacks. I can't imagine what it's like there at the moment.

Why do we hold Israel to such a standard, suggesting they aren't allowed to attack or go after Hamas lest civilians are harmed yet almost nothing is said about Hamas deliberate basing themselves in the civilian populations and using human shields? If the aim is to de-escalate the situation, why don't Hamas just give back every hostage they have today?

I see some MPs and celebs are making fools of themselves by using the phrase from the river to the sea and getting themselves in hot water.

He also makes a mealy mouthed qualifying statement about the atrocities from Hamas at the beginning of a diatribe so he can then focus solely on any wrongs he perceives to have been committed by Israel and that's all he mentions for weeks on end. He knows he can't ignore Hamas entirely. He's an odious toad. As are many on the left who do the same thing.