Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About callippo

  • Rank
    Registered User

Personal Information

  • Location
  1. the only threads I can see on here are over 5 years old. it is not much stuff at all. Looking for under 50 quid ideally.
  2. Labour should win it. 44% of Londoners voted Labour at the last election - an election they may have lost massively nationwide, but one in which they did well in London. If the whole country voted last May the same way London did, Miliband would be the Prime Minister now. They got a massive 7% swing in London. Labour has 61% of London's parliamentary seats. If the Labour candidate doesn't win the mayoral election there should be some very serious questions asked.
  3. what is this. It is not a 'Tory policy' to 'import' the sport into the UK. What kind of a totally ridiculous notion, is that. maybe it, the sport, is making another attempt to popularize itself here. The last time, was in the 1980s when it became quite trendy. Channel 4 televised it every week and the sport attracted some support. why shouldn't the sport want to showcase itself here. The UK is one of the largest countries in Europe. And there is 200,000 American-born people in the UK, most of whom are in London. Why shouldn't they get an opportunity for a day out. when Liverpool or Mancehester United play a friendly game of soccer in the USA, would you also consider it to be a Democratic or Republican policy to promote soccer there? Do you see what a totally ridiculous notion it is? ---------- Post added 08-03-2016 at 08:55 ---------- that depends what you call North America - it is after all a single continent, not two or three. Columbus never went over the Equator in America and stayed in the northern hemisphere the whole time.
  4. having a secular constitution is a total red herring. It's irrelevant. Take this : No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights. that sounds like a secular type set up, right? well think again, because that is taken from the constitution of the Philippines, where the largest and most powerful church permeates every facet of life in the whole country affecting everybody's life on a daily basis, and where not only abortion, but divorce remains illegal - the only country in the world, where this is so. What a constitution says, and what actually happens, are two totally different things.
  5. the massive constitutional reform necessary to revamp the UK as a totally secular state is like abolishing the monarchy. It would take years, be deeply divisive, and rip the heart out of the country. Given that the UK is a de facto secular state anyway, and one of the more advanced ones where all the key indicators like not only divorce, gay rights, abortion but same-sex marriage is about the become legal too, anybody that seriously wants to see all the chaos that would ensue for what amounts to being merely whimsical reasons, needs their heads examining.
  6. I would go so far as to say what the constitution of the country actually says on church vs. state hardly matters in de facto reality. The world is littered full of examples. Take Israel, or the Philippines. Neither country has any official religion, and church and state are indivisible in both. If you were merely to look at their constitutions, you would think that both of them are totally secular countries with no input from religous authority in government at all. However that is not the way it plays at in both of those countries, as religion affects nearly everybody in one way or another on a daily basis. The Philippines is the only country in the world where divorce is still illegal and it is all down to the effect of the church on state. You might think, provided you were a total idiot, that this would be impossible given its secular consitution. it's not difficult. All you have to do is take a walk on a main street in just about any of the UK's cities to realise that this is one of the most secular countries you are likely to find anywhere.
  7. Erdogan is like Thatcher in the more secular UK. Good politican with high skill, but divisive. He's been there for 10 years in most liberal democracies that is more than enough and people will wamt ypu out. However I would be reluctant to slag off Erdogan. He's good and very talented politcian if maybe now for some Turks, rather dated. I am not looking on this Turkey story, anything especially negative.
  8. you guys just need some lessons about what de facto means, and also what operational legislative law means, and how far away any religous division, is remotely close to implementing it. You are living in the clouds. The last thing Britain needs is some showy secular 'revolution'. It has been achieved already, on the quiet.
  9. Britain has become a de facto secular country. It is not necessary to banish all Christian symbolism, in a reactionary way like France or Turkey did in their revolutions, in order to become secular. Secularism can evolve anyway and that is what has happened in Britain. There being a monarch who is also head of a particular faith is a red herring.
  10. the UK has never NOT been a major manufacturing nation - though it would have ceased to have been a major manufacturing nation years ago if it had continued to manufacture British made things that people used to want, like steel or aluminium, rather than manufacture British made things that people want now, like pizza.
  11. both the UK and Turkey are secular in overall character but the present Turkish government at the moment is certainly less secular than not only the UK, but also previous Turkish governments - unless you would want to argue that the Tory party is still the 'Church of England at prayer' which surely very few people would these days. The Justice and Development Party headed by Erdogan that has been governing the country for over a decade has its roots in Islamist groups like the 'Virtue Party' which was banned for violating Turkey's secular constitution.
  12. that is the main battlefield the big 5. With tiny Israel, and even tinier Cyprus just looking on. If I was Lebanese I would be quite scared now. However they are only small. Long Live Lebanon. They are even smaller, than Israel.
  13. it's just their turn for the 'Arab spring' basically - even though the Turks are not Arabs. They were never going to escape it. All of the Big Five Middle East cities or powerbases, Istanbul/Ankara included, are going to get it. The other four, are Cairo, Damascus, Baghdad, and Tehran. Obviously, the first two have got it in spades, but the other two will eventually join the club. it's a proper real political storm.
  14. total pedant. The Turks are ancient, yes ancient. Of course will be watching them now same as usual. The thing to look for is if, yes they do allow hijab in government buildings. That's when we will know that the fashion has crossed a line.
  15. when they try to make out that Arabs are 'bloodthirsty' on the international stage, it is just a touch of Islamophobia, even though around 10% of Arabs worldwide are not Muslims at all, but Christians. where yes, you really can make out that Arabs are 'bloodthirsty' or violent is in not the international, but the domestic arena and the way Arab governments change of which the current situation in Syria is not an unusual example at all - in fact it is almost normal. It's almost always coups, assassinations, and civil wars. There, they really are as violent as anybody in the world.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.