hutch

Why would that have any bearing on what the BBC broadcasts?

Another little gem from the BBC? This one was about 6 months ago, again on World Service radio. It was a live telephone interview with a woman from Iceland that had opened her home for Syrian refugees. When asked what her neighbours felt she had to admit that she hadn't actually done it yet but she was considering it. A bit of a silence, but instead of cutting the interview short the gallant presenter persevered. She asked what was the weather like for refugees coming from the heat of Syria to Iceland. Again Mrs. Big-Heart couldn't answer, as she wasn't actually in Iceland. She was in London. But what was she doing in London I hear you ask. She works there of course. As a lawyer. Specialising in handling immigration appeals for assylum seekers. The organisation is an embarrassment. It's past saving and should be shut down.

But you told us that... which is, at best, mischievous. it's been stated here many, many times that nobody, but nobody, has ever said that genuine refugees from the civil war in Syria should not be taken into Europe for safety. This debate is about the events in Cologne at New Year. The facts (real ones) are that out of 31 people arrested so far, 18 are recent "border-busting" assylum seekers. Of the 31 arrested, 27 are Arabs, but only 4 of those are Syrian. So this is nothing to do with closing the doors of Europe to those pouring out of Syria. It is to do with having proper border controls to make sure that bunches of potential thugs from anywhere between Bangladesh and Morocco are sent packing unless they have a genuine reason to enter Europe. In my opinion, FWIW, these groups of men from all over the Arab world are far more responsible for the deaths of innocent women and children in the Mediterranean than we are, because they constantly overload and abuse those facilities that exist from the EU, UN and various charities that exist to deal with genuine refugees. The reality is that for every Syrian refugee that has entered Europe, half a dozen other potential thugs have sneaked in beside them. Events now demonstrate that they may turn out to be rapists or terrorists. It was wrong to do it, and it would be wrong to allow it to continue. I remember listening to an interview on BBC World Service radio a few months ago. They were doing follow-up with refugees that they had interviewed previously. It was a young Syrian man who was heading for Germany. In the follow up, he had arrived safely in Germany and been registered. He told the interviewer that they told him that he could stay in a hostel with other young Syrian men that were in the same position as him, to help him to acclimatise to his new life. When he got there they put him in a 4-bed dormitory. He was surprised to find that he was the only Syrian among them. In my opinion Britain is doing a reasonable job of bringing properly vetted genuine Syrian refugees to Britain, for an initial 5 year period, and otherwise keeping the rest out at Calais. I think we should probably bring more genuine refugees.

No you've got it all wrong. Corbyn's got the whole party army behind him. All 250,000 of them. He'll be fine.

Do you? What do you know about that difference? Is it from your own experience or just something else you've read on Google? Is it likely to have any effect on the behaviour of young men suddenly uprooted from one culture and dropped straight into another? Should western Europeans be concerned about that?

Remember in their world a balance sheet is something you use to cover up the folding table at a press conference.

...unless they cover themselves up properly, and only go out accompanied by a male relative?

I'm not sure you can assume that the BBC content is representative of the general "British attitude" any more. The point you make would be more accurately levied at the decline in moral, ethical and professional standards at the BBC rather than the British public in general.

Or alternatively they make all the gingers wear a burkha

For goodness sake soggy are you really that stupid? HMG regularly put out official statements about the number of terror attacks thwarted due to intelligence surveillance. Do you think they have just added 2,000 more staff at GCHQ to monitor your personal porn activity?

The Fenland drains in East Anglia are a work of engineering genius. They will continue to work for as long as the moon orbits the earth.

I think, Tim, that my point was it's a bit hollow to criticise a fellow poster for "bigging up" his source's credentials by "bigging up" your own source's credentials.

OPEC's HQ isn't in Saudi Arabia. It's in Vienna.

Yes, and yes. Remember flood defences don't stop flooding, they just move it from one place to another.

Your question was how long will this (flooding I assume) go on. I say it will go on forever, just as it always has in the past. Despite those nasty people at Volkswagen, or whether there's a third runway at Heathrow or not.

It's been going on for around two billion years so it won't change any time soon. We ought to be planning to cope with it rather than pretend we (and that means somebody else, not me) can prevent it from happening. It's only water. The biggest problems stem from building houses out of plasterboard and cardboard and filling them with chipboard and foam furniture.

Personally I think it's a good thing, provided that we elect representatives that are able to separate wheat from chaff. Listening to a wide variety of opinions is generally a good thing for intelligent people. Corbyn ought to give it a go sometime. But if it was actually to become official Party policy, where elected Members were denied freedom of thought, then that would be a whole different ballgame.

I know. It's atrocious isn't it, that Britain should have so many successful businessmen, creating so much wealth and so many jobs for other British people. And worse still that some politicians should actually think that this is a good thing. It shouldn't be allowed.

Unless, of course, we have a Labour government, in which case the elected Members will be required to take their instructions from the unelected comrades.

Let them keep it as a punishment. Hosting the WC brings 5 years of infestation by the bloodsucking parasite fifa accreditus and has no known benefits. Apart from the publicity. Both Russia and Qatar are wallowing in all that positive PR aren't they.

...

I don't think Cook's really a halfwit. I think he said that just to see if the idiot journalist was stupid enough to actually print it.

"This period of five games up until we face Ipswich away in the FA Cup, we've set ourselves a target to get as many points out of 15 as we can," Cook added. Genius.

That's a bit churlish isn't it? The big fracking report published last week proved beyond any doubt that although fracking will provide absolutely no benefit whatsoever to anybody in Britain, it will be really really good for the fracking companies. See, it's a win-win for everybody.

Thank fook for that. Now we can have a proper argument