Verbal

Absolutely correct, yes. That would be the logical conclusion.

There is a theory - only a theory, mind - that those who are strongest in their condemnation of a particular practice are themselves subject to the very urges they condemn. The most recent evidence was the American, ferociously anti-gay TV evangelist who turned out to be...guess what? Just saying.

Oh trousers, where to start?

More like Pl*nker Central. 'Full members' locking horns. What a terrible image.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UHN3zHoYA0&feature=player_embedded Personally, this seems a little OTT...but maybe necessary. Good to see Gillian Anderson back to her explosive best though.

I was referring to your comical idea about 'good education and upbringing'. The 'geek' conversation was with someone else.

True, but different orders of magnitude.

Never in the history of humankind has a religion been so soaked in blood as Roman Catholicism. Although it now has serious competition, Roman Catholicism is way out there in the campaign to spread human misery through reckless prohibitions that encourage the destruction of people and families, especially in the developing world. Scientology is a barely registered annoyance by comparison.

For all that scientology is truly loathsome, nothing - but nothing - can compete with the Catholic Church. Or to be more precise, the Roman interpretation of Christianity - which has imposed brutal, mindless authoritarianism, dressed up in the garb of impenetrable ritual. No wonder Blair was such a devotee. The list of the Roman church's crimes are way too long to mention. The Roman diktats about what constituted the Bible - the forced removal of the 'secret' Book of John (a peaen to original Christian values) and the inclusion of several monstrosities in the Old Testament - are reason enough for reasonable people to disregard its message. But the sheer, horrific, often misogynistic violence of its past, and the casual, condoned abuse of the vulnerable in the present, render it beyond the pale. Any notion that Travolta et al, for all their sinister weirdness, can come close is preposterous. I speak, of course, as a lapsed Catholic.

Idiots and offensive people are the reason I enjoy reading the guff here - even if it is at the expense of knowing that the owners have secret bank accounts in the Bahamas and sun themselves every other week in Cap D'Antibes. Actually, we could do with more idiots. I'd pay for that.

Then I am officially mortified.

This is a much bigger issue in the US, where it has become all wrapped up in the touchy subject of race. Bill Cosby has famously led a campaign for years now, trying to get young black Americans from disappearing into the limiting patois of urban-speak. Even though - as Ali G pastiched - it's taken up widely in youth culture, it is actually, says Cosby, speech-poor, and therefore a means of reinforcing all kinds of inequalities.

Does not compute. I've never suggested he wasn't.

Agreed. Red Ken got elected in the 80s because large numbers of Londoners wanted to say f**k you to Thatch and Murdoch's hacks who hated him. (Thatch famously abolished the GLC just to get rid of him.) 'Red' actually made him popular - that and the free bus rides and cheap tube fares.

He may be good, he may be crap. But you will go nuts if you make up your mind after one day, then find yourself having to trust the alternative... Decide in haste, repent at leisure.

It's a long and sorry tale, trousers. According to Liberty, over 60 new powers, contained in 25 separate Acts of Parliament, have eroded rights enshrined not only in the Human Right Act, but in Magna Carta itself. They range from excessive surveillance (eg. anti-terror laws now used to spy on parents claiming their children live in popular school catchment areas) and extradition without a prima facie case (Gary McKinnon, the autistic hacker facing the rest of his life in a US jail), to imprisonment without trial (Britain has one of the longest periods of detention without charge in the western world). And, on the other side of the coin, Britain remains - the FOI notwithstanding - the most secretive state in the western world. David Miliband has been heavily implicated in swinging the wrecking ball through such ancient rights, to the point where he is being accused of acceding to requests or information to torture British subjects. And, again, his support of New Labour's war in Iraq means we HAVE to see the back of him. However good or bad EM proves to be, electing DM was unthinkable. According to Shami Chrakrabarti, who widely respected lawyer who runs Liberty, 'We have lived under one of the most authoritarian ages in living memory.'

You could be right. However, the fallout from Labour's invasion of Iraq (!) and its enthusiastic participation in torturing the opposition in the War on Terror meant that DM was and may continue to be damaged goods - especially as the various inquiries and leaks continue. DM has for long been one of the loudest cheerleaders for war (see his caught-on-camera moment yesterday), and may yet face legal trouble over his 'acquiescence' (and foreknowledge?) to the torturers. He was also one of the ringleaders in the closing down of civil liberties - perhaps New Labour's greatest crime over the last nine years.

The weirdness of scientology isn't the problem - it's the thuggish, oppressive way in which they deal with dissenters and critics. Campaigns of sustained intimidation are common, not just against those who have the temerity to leave, but against anyone who investigates them in any way whatsoever.

Because, if you do maths you've just supplied, it means certain electoral victory for Labour next time. HTH.

Ask Benjii. He's the expert apparently - but it seems in his cap-doffing universe to exclude anyone from the traditional breeding grounds of our glorious rulers.

I'd agree with that. The harm done by the massively escalating wealth gap was a point well made, and needs to be addressed urgently, unless Britain is to slump mindlessly into a kind of East-European low-wage economy with all the economic downshifting that that entails for everyone but the super-rich Marie Antoinettes. It does, though, mean that EM will have to abandon not just the name but all the corrosive neoliberal policies of New Labour.

Which was rather rather my point, re: minority of Labour MPs, etc etc. Democracy is and always will be deficient in some way - not that that's a reason for complacency.

Rubbish?

“The English FA did approach us with a view to recreating the project for 2010. They sent us some tapes and everything,” reveals Dr Wellington. “But what you have to realise is that for hoaxes to work, they need at least a small element of plausibility."

By the same token, the majority of people did not vote for Cameron. If ever he becomes PM we will have real problems.