hypochondriac

It's a single plum soaked in perfume, served in a man's hat.

Whilst I agree that Putin would like nothing more than to undermine our institutions, the sad truth is that they are already doing a pretty good job of that themselves without Russia's help.

Hopefully everyone agrees with that--I don't think many on here have been defending him for this- but let's not pretend that there isn't an insidious culture being exported by a faction of the Pakistani Muslim community that means there is a disproportionate number engaged in these activities. To acknowledge this fact and to discuss how to solve this problem should never be labelled as "racist" or nonsense terms like islamophobic otherwise you're engaging in similar sorts of behaviour that meant that the Rotherham rapists got away with their crimes for so long. The disproportionate numbers of people from these communities engaged in these acts and the part their specific culture played in it has to be acknowledged by the security services in this country of we do not want more of this in the future. As previously mentioned, to ignore or try to silence legitimate discussions that should be taking place about this issue simply leaves a vacuum for people like Tommy or maybe others with more overtly racists motives.

Did you even bother to read my post? Did you notice that the Muslim judge who has been involved in these cases has stated that many of these cases were not tried earlier due to a fear of racism? Did you watch the BBC drama three girls that clearly outlined the problem? Gangs of Pakistani Muslims have raped teenage white girls and they have either not been prosecuted or seen big delays in justice because people in authority were scared they would be accused of racism for confronting the issue and doing something about it. Your personal experience with the cps is entirely irrelevant- those with direct experience in these cases have outlined the problems clearly and if you continue to deny it - as you obviously will- then it's tantamount to stick your fingers in your ears and humming loudly.

"For too long in this country, we the media, the chattering classes, the Liberal elite have ignored the issue of grooming gangs of young vulnerable teenage girls who have been victimised, drugged, raped and abused. Whether it's the Rotherham case or the other cases located across the country, it is both the conclusion of the prosecutor in the Rotherham case- British Pakistani Muslim naseer asral- and indeed the official inquiry into why it took so long for these young vulnerable underage girls to get justice, that fear of racism prevented us from coming to the defence of underage girls. This means that the state was scared that it would be accused of being racist if it rightly arrested and prosecuted largely British Pakistani Muslims men in their abuse of underage White teenage girls. So for fear of appearing racist there was a silence across the country as multiple cases of grooming gangs emerged up and down the country as evidenced now by multiple successful prosecutions but sadly too late. If we hadn't all been silent, if we had all addressed this issue head on when it needed to be addressed then the void would not have emerged for the populist agitators to fill that gap and become popular as a result of addressing what is a legitimate issue, ended up highjacking what should have been the concern of every right minded citizen in this country. Unfortunately it take a bit of courage to talk about something that people will hurl abuse at you for talking about. Sarah champion of the Labour Party attempted to address this and lost her position on the front bench as a result. There have been multiple cases now and it's beyond any level of doubt that there is a disproportionate number of British Muslims involved in grooming gangs against underage White girls and to say that is to report on the facts, it's not to be racist and if we're backing away from this conversation, all we're doing is leaving the ground open on what is a legitimate issue which requires addressing, allowing the populist to highjack the issue and make it their own. It's easy in this case to pick on the bogeyman, but the truth is that our silence over decades in this country is the real bogeyman and that's the real thing we should despise- our own cowardice in the face of grooming of young girls and our conspiracy of silence. " I'll highlight the pertinent bit again just so you can understand the clear difference between historical sexual abuse in the Catholic Church - which is abhorrent in case it has to be said - and these cases: "There have been multiple cases now and it's beyond any level of doubt that there is a disproportionate number of British Muslims involved in grooming gangs against underage White girls and to say that is to report on the facts, it's not to be racist." So spare me your pathetic false equivalences and your whatabboutery, there is a clear and PRESENT problem with a disproportionate number of Pakistani Muslim rape gangs who abuse white British girls whilst the media and wider society have been largely silent and in some cases covered it up. Other cases of rape and sexual abuse are entirely irrelevant to the discussion and the very specific cultural and religions motivations for these abuses.

That may well be true- certainly hatred of all Muslims will be the motivation for some bigoted types who are members of the edl- but I would suggest that normal members of the public should be equally shocked and appaled by gangs commiting some of the worst crimes imaginable- primarily British Pakistani Muslim gangs raping underage White girls with no remorse because they see them as sub human. Any right thinking person should be absolutely horrified regardless of their biases towards Muslims or their thoughts on Islam. Hopefully we can all agree on that.

I know why you posted that. Here's Douglas writing a typically superb and balanced article on the matter. I'd be interested to know which parts of it you disagree with. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/amp/?__twitter_impression=true "The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them. As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation."

Exactly. We wouldn't get relegated with them in the squad and fans would much rather give them a chance than see long for the 100th time. I'd genuinely rather see some achievement with some homegrown youngsters than a bunch of foreigners who don't give a toss and who will be off the first chance they get anyway.

And yet we performed so poorly without them last season. Would we have been worse with those four in the team? I suspect not.

An odd thing to say considering all of our players who have been out on loan have played for us at various points. Reed was good enough a few years back when we finished mid table but not good enough for a team finishing 17th?

Yes, we made a choice to loan out youth players and let other teams play them. It's a choice we obviously wouldn't have made under pochettino.

It's not irrelevant since the point Adrian was making is that we consciously made a decision not to give youth a chance and to buy in expensive players. Had we decided to give Gallagher some game time this year then we wouldn't have bought Carillo and would probably have ended up with a better player. Harrison Reed was good enough to be in the squad a few years ago, what has changed? Likewise Targett. I'd rather see them

Would Gallagher really have been much worse than Carillo last season?

Cool. I'll give you a vote.

So because I don't think he's a neo nazi monster I must totally agree with him or think he's a lovely bloke? It's not a black or white scenario. I've listened to some of his recent media interviews and there are some things he says that are worthy of sensible debate. I don't think he's a neo nazi monster that some people portray him as. I'd prefer to listen to what he says and make up my own mind thanks. Obviously the likes of the Oxford Union felt he had something worth discussing as he was given a platform there. I've already said how he says things and comes across is going to turn many people off and I disagree with a lot of what he says and does too but I'm not going to entirely dismiss someone because he's called a nazi by the guardian and people on twitter.

I don't fall into either but nice try to attempt to falsely pigeon hole me. I already said he only has himself to blame for the conviction. The spiked article I linked already summarises my views clearly. Tommy Robinson is no free speech advocate in this case but neither is he a neo nazi monster that some would have you believe.

Here's a very good article on the matter: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/tommy-robinson-is-no-free-speech-martyr/21448#.Ww6MXsvTWdM "Free speech is too important for us to allow it to be consistently warped and slandered by both left and right. Free speech is about allowing a free and unhindered exchange of ideas. But, at the same time, we must recognise that the reason Robinson has a career is that we have become overly sensitive as a society to the kind of arguments he makes. He is a product not of too much free speech, but of too little. His arrest is not symbolic of a state conspiracy to shut him up. But it is at least connected to our continuing discomfort with discussing certain ideas."

My avatar has entirely achieved its objective.

It was mostly popularised by hillary Clinton doing a bizarre hit piece on it during the election campaign. It was then carried on with kekistan parodying identity politics and the tendency from certain sections to see racism in everything they disagree with. It could be described as childish but then most memes tend to be which I think is part of their appeal. Certainly its existence seems to get all the type of people you would avoid at a party incredibly wound up.

Will they? Would be a very brave judge who declared a mistrial based on that. I agree though, what he did was stupid.

My point is it would definitely increase the audience and raise the profile if that is what they want. I'm not fussed either way I just thought it curious that they tried to make it its own separate thing and yet had the exact same rules and regulations as the men which highlights the difference in quality.

I never understood why they don't play women's sports in tandem with the men's (it works for tennis.) if they had the women's World Cup on during the men's version and extended that to cricket and other sports then it would definitely get a lot more interest. I personally wouldn't watch a women's World Cup, but if it's on immediately after the men's game then I'd probably give it a watch.

Depends on your definition of a moron I suppose. I certainly think he doesn't help his cause with the way he speaks sometimes and he doesn't choose his language carefully enough to ever be acceptable to a mainstream audience, but it is galling when he is wilfully misrepresented by the likes of Piers Morgan. I definitely think it's unfair to characterise "most" of his supporters as a bunch of far right nut bars, certainly he attracts some unsavoury characters but there are a number of perfectly legitimate people that worry about the erosion of free speech in the UK and the prevalence of Muslim rape gang trials etc and who share a common cause with the likes of Tommy Robinson in that respect, yet wouldn't recognise your characterisation of far right at all. Personally I think a bit more respect from both sides would be healthy and it would have probably meant there was less tension and he wouldn't have got himself banged up by some in authority desperate to get rid of him.

I don't think he's a moron, but he isn't the person who's going to persuade Middle England to his cause due to who he is and how he presents himself. Someone like Douglas Murray has a much better chance considering he's gay, erudite and chooses his words carefully.

To be fair, whilst the law is questionable, he did potentially compromise the court proceedings through his careless reporting. I would suggest it wasn't the smartest thing in the world to go live streaming outside a case that has reporting restrictions when he already has a suspended sentence for contempt of court. I have sympathy for him and I think the sentence is incredibly harsh and they've obviously gone after him because of who he is, but he did leave himself open to something like this because technically he did break the law.