In or Out- the EU referendum mega thread

[evil8beezle]

Carryfast:

Evil8Beezle:

Carryfast:
The point in this case being that the local butcher’s or Tesco will go broke,and/or at least face some justified aggro,in the form of objections,if they start selling dog meat in addition to beef and pork and lamb.

I quite liked the Iceland horse lasagna!

Not exactly the same thing as putting dog on the menu though and they only got away with flogging horse meat because people thought it was beef.

To be fair I’d give dog a try, but at the same time appreciate why it’s frowned upon in this country!

[rjan]

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
But the degree of impact is the question. Putting the shop elsewhere (assuming it is still reasonably nearby) is not likely to be a great imposition in the scheme of things. In fact, having no shop at all is not likely to be a great imposition compared to the status quo, given that it’s a proposal for new premises.

OK that’s fine, lets go down that route then.
So if I open up an off licence in a backstreet somewhere in Saudi Arabia I’ll be OK then?
No, I thought not…

Tolerance is a 2 way street, pity some cultures don’t see it that way…

But we’re not in a quid pro quo with Saudi Arabia. We’re in a quid pro quo with various sections of British society - the vast majority of Muslims are not just off the banana boat from Saudi Arabia, many were born here to parents who were born here, and the grandparents have lived and worked here for decades and are settled for good.

If there is any truth this butcher shop story, it’s not a case of Brits being asked to forfeit their high street for a few hard-faced Johnny-come-latelys, it’s a case of a number of Muslim Brits asking that a small accommodation be made by placing a shop whose product they avoid for reasons of deep and consistent belief, be set up elsewhere.

I could imagine a Christian priest saying a similar thing about a nightclub setting up next door to the church. The two may never be open at the same time, and the clientele may differ, so there is no question of any material detriment, but the priest could quite legitimately ask that the sanctity of the immediate area of the church be respected (particularly with regard to the nightclub hosting activities that will likely stand in stark contrast to the priest’s teachings), and that there are many alternative places for the nightclub. Once used condoms start getting slung over the railings and the graveyard becomes a midnight meeting place, the case for separating the two is even more compelling.

If the Christian church had a grudge against butcher’s shops, that too would be treated like a nightclub. And the Christian church would almost certainly object to a ■■■ shop or an abortion clinic.

We must just accept that, for the time being, a flourish of the Muslim religion is a grudge against pig meat (just like other religions have odd or out-dated diktaks, like Jehovah’s Witnesses with blood transfusions, or Christians still with abortion), and that this can be resolved to mutual satisfaction by geographic separation.

Some things are important to Brits, but the right of a butcher to slap a new shop anywhere he ■■■■ well pleases is not a British principle or tradition. In fact, the long-standing British principle is that local communities decide what goes where according to whatever preferences they hold, and since an aversion to pig meat is a firm Muslim principle, it is appropriate to place the butchers further rather than closer to them. And just because we accept that placing the 300yds away from the starting point is a reasonable compromise, doesn’t mean we have to accept that it should be placed 300 miles away or offshore (if any significant number of Muslims were to make this more onerous request instead of the more modest one).

[evil8beezle]

Rjan:
But we’re not in a quid pro quo with Saudi Arabia. We’re in a quid pro quo with various sections of British society - the vast majority of Muslims are not just off the banana boat from Saudi Arabia, many were born here to parents who were born here, and the grandparents have lived and worked here for decades and are settled for good.

I don’t agree, I’m talking about respecting the existing culture of the country they choose to inhabit, and not expecting it to change to suit them, whether it was the beliefs of them or their past generations when they came to this country. End of!

[rjan]

Evil8Beezle:
To be fair I’d give dog a try, but at the same time appreciate why it’s frowned upon in this country!

I’d give any meat a try in principle, but it’s hard to relate to things as being both family members and food (particularly because it doesn’t represent a natural life cycle, like eating a tree’s fruit does, unless you only eat animals after they’ve died naturally), and if I am to choose I prefer to relate to dogs as family members and not food.

It’s a question of moral integrity and the way in which we train ourselves to think and feel about different objects. The recreation we do with dogs is part of that. You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

As an aside, it’s a bit like Michael Gove being a Tory-lover and now a Tory-eater!

[evil8beezle]

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

[desypete]

Rjan:

The-Snowman:
I know what you’re saying but theres a difference from wanting to open an abattoir next to a school which would recieve justifiable objections to a simple butchers.

What is justifiable is a matter of opinion. As I say, Brits would be far less tolerant of a butcher that dealt in dog meat rather than pig meat.

While the points you make are valid and correct to a certain degree, they are more extreme than the example I gave. It is the fact it was refused on the grounds they only had to walk past it on the way. It wasnt even particullarly close to the mosque itself which is an objection I would understand. Thats the dangerous road I was talking about. You cant start banning butchers from opening anywhere in case there are offended muslims. Where does it end?

I agree, but I’ve yet to come across a substantial case of intolerance by Muslims, whereas I constantly hear spurious complaints about it from those with prejudices or right-wing agendas.

In fact, even cases that raise my suspicions like talk of schools “banning Christmas”, what you find is that it is the British staff who have acted unilaterally (or have just been too lazy to put on a Christmas play that year, or have completely misunderstood their legal obligations). Minority communities do not respond with cheering, but by exclaiming “good grief man, nobody asked for this!”, because they can see how intolerant and illegitimate it would be to ask for such a thing.

No pubs or off licenses either? Will all shops selling food and drink need to be closed during the ramadan fasting period? Being tolerant of peoples beliefs has to work both ways. BTW, I dont even know if it was actual muslims who objected. For all I know they wernt actually bothered and it was that the owner didnt bung a big enough envelope stuffed with cash through the right letter box and the poor muslims are getting the blame. But that was the reason given.
Im not having a go at Muslims only here btw. Im not one of those types. I also cant stand vegans and vegitarians who try to force their beliefs on others. Im a tee total. I cant stand alcohol and im not a big fan of drunk people. But if there was an application for an off license at the end of my street, who am I to say no one else should drink if they want to? The only way the butchers should have had his application declined would be for things like hes a dirty [zb] or he didnt have the right certificates for food hygeine or something like that. Not “just incase” some people get offended. you cant start banning things just in case or it would never end

I agree. The iron law I’ve found on this is that these stories are never what they seem.

Look get one thing clear this is Britain and a butchers shop is acceptable to British people they can and should be able to open and trade anywhere. Just because Muslims don’t like it well that is hard luck they have to respect our way of life. Not the other way around. This sort of thing is what breeds racism from most ordinary folk as no one can into someone else home and start telling them how they should live in there own home
For to long it’s been a case of trying not to offend and bending over backwards etc but the knock on effect is how it puts the natives out hence this strong feeling that has grown between a them and us

[carryfast]

Rjan:
But we’re not in a quid pro quo with Saudi Arabia. We’re in a quid pro quo with various sections of British society - the vast majority of Muslims are not just off the banana boat from Saudi Arabia, many were born here to parents who were born here, and the grandparents have lived and worked here for decades and are settled for good.

If there is any truth this butcher shop story, it’s not a case of Brits being asked to forfeit their high street for a few hard-faced Johnny-come-latelys, it’s a case of a number of Muslim Brits asking that a small accommodation be made by placing a shop whose product they avoid for reasons of deep and consistent belief, be set up elsewhere.

I could imagine a Christian priest saying a similar thing about a nightclub setting up next door to the church. The two may never be open at the same time, and the clientele may differ, so there is no question of any material detriment, but the priest could quite legitimately ask that the sanctity of the immediate area of the church be respected (particularly with regard to the nightclub hosting activities that will likely stand in stark contrast to the priest’s teachings), and that there are many alternative places for the nightclub. Once used condoms start getting slung over the railings and the graveyard becomes a midnight meeting place, the case for separating the two is even more compelling.

If the Christian church had a grudge against butcher’s shops, that too would be treated like a nightclub. And the Christian church would almost certainly object to a ■■■ shop or an abortion clinic.

We must just accept that, for the time being, a flourish of the Muslim religion is a grudge against pig meat (just like other religions have odd or out-dated diktaks, like Jehovah’s Witnesses with blood transfusions, or Christians still with abortion), and that this can be resolved to mutual satisfaction by geographic separation.

Some things are important to Brits, but the right of a butcher to slap a new shop anywhere he ■■■■ well pleases is not a British principle or tradition. In fact, the long-standing British principle is that local communities decide what goes where according to whatever preferences they hold, and since an aversion to pig meat is a firm Muslim principle, it is appropriate to place the butchers further rather than closer to them. And just because we accept that placing the 300yds away from the starting point is a reasonable compromise, doesn’t mean we have to accept that it should be placed 300 miles away or offshore (if any significant number of Muslims were to make this more onerous request instead of the more modest one).

Contradictory bs.The Islamic world looks to Saudi Arabia as it’s highest level of instruction.Not the UK or its culture.Which is why we’re discussing the likes and dislikes of the immigrant communities.

As for the abortion issue.Ironically I don’t agree with abortion unless it’s the result of special circumstances.On the basis that life begins at conception not birth.Does that mean I refuse to tolerate it in a country which is pro abortion, no.IE if I didn’t tolerate it at best I’d move to Poland oh look an anti abortion EU country.Just as anyone who doesn’t want to tolerate the fact that we are a, pro alchohol,pro pork,anti dog,eating and pro humane slaughter country,can zb off if they don’t want to tolerate it.Let me guess your idea of a Socialist Europe is one in which the Poles are forced to adopt your obviously typically Socialist pro abortion line.While the Brits have to tolerate your equally Socialist pro Arab line.You really do confirm all the usual stereotypes of the bs dictatorial Socialist agenda to the point where you’d be at home in Merkel’s stasi run East Germany or Tito’s Yugoslavia.

[rjan]

Evil8Beezle:
I don’t agree, I’m talking about respecting the existing culture of the country they choose to inhabit, and not expecting it to change to suit them, whether it was the beliefs of them or their past generations when they came to this country. End of!

The children of immigrants haven’t chosen to inhabit this country, and have no more chosen their culture than ‘indigenous Brits’ do. The bottom line is that Brits do not even have such a coherent culture in the sense of there being a complete codified system applying to every aspect of life that every individual agrees on. It would be sclerotic if it did.

What we really have is a minority of jingoistic cultural priests who set themselves up as the authority of “British culture”, which is whatever they alone judge it to be or want it to be, and then set about trying to impose themselves on everyone else (indigenous Brits as well as any minorities).

[evil8beezle]

Rjan:

Evil8Beezle:
I don’t agree, I’m talking about respecting the existing culture of the country they choose to inhabit, and not expecting it to change to suit them, whether it was the beliefs of them or their past generations when they came to this country. End of!

The children of immigrants haven’t chosen to inhabit this country, and have no more chosen their culture than ‘indigenous Brits’ do. The bottom line is that Brits do not even have such a coherent culture in the sense of there being a complete codified system applying to every aspect of life that every individual agrees on. It would be sclerotic if it did.

What we really have is a minority of jingoistic cultural priests who set themselves up as the authority of “British culture”, which is whatever they alone judge it to be or want it to be, and then set about trying to impose themselves on everyone else (indigenous Brits as well as any minorities).

You are basically saying because we are not a backwards nation rules by religion, we should take it up the arse in a liberal fashion, while those less evolved countries can behave intolerantly…
So what if those what were born here choose not to follow our faith and culture, they do have a choice you know!

[desypete]

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

You would eat anything if there was no food to be had dogs cats foxes etc it’s because we have the luxury of being able to pick and choose what we eat that sets us apart from some countries were a dog or cat can feed a family who have nothing. Now of course there would be outrage over here should a race start to sell cats legs and chips or dog tail supreme and rightly so as we are a nation that doesn’t do that sort of thing so again it’s our values that have to come first for anyone who comes here to live just like we would have to accept there way of life should we go to there country to live

[carryfast]

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

I’m happy with some dogs while others are vicious zb’s that need getting rid of.Does that mean I’d want to eat the dangerous dogs that are put down on that basis.No thanks.We ain’t Korea.

While it’s also possible to differentiate pet animals from those bred for food within the indigenous food sector.So no there’s no way that I’d want to eat anyone’s pet pig but,unfortunately for the usual farm animal,that’s obviously fair game.But I still expect the unfortunate animal to be slaughtered to the most humane standards possible.

[winseer]

alicks77:

Winseer:

robroy:

alicks77:
I’ve never heard anyone call for sharia law in this country except the usual zealots and they are a tiny tiny minority.

Are they Muslim community like 3% of the british population and most British Muslims when asked don’t want sharia law so I don’t know who you’ve heard asked about it. The only people that are obsessed with it are the right wingers, who say if people don’t obey our laws they should be killed. Which is essentially sharia law.

Are you for real mate or what??

[emoji38] [emoji38]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPXG4pdPj4w

These things have a habit of creeping up on you… And then they are right on top of you!

3%? - My arse!

Sorry you are right. According to Google the 2011 census a massive 4.5% of the british population are Muslim. They really are taking over.

Yes, indeed. That’s an incease of 50% over even the official estimates…

Besides, who fills in these damned surveys to get counted in the first place anyway?

I don’t believe for a minute that only 4.5% of this nation’s population are Muslim. Think about it: If you said 4.5% of British HOUSEHOLDS in this country were Muslim - that would be closer to the truth.
How many in each house? - More than the average 2.4 kids in a non-Muslim’s house let’s say… Demographic abnormalities start to occur when you typically have 4-7 kids, and more than one family unit lives under the same roof to boot… I’m not being alarmist about Muslims here - I’m being alarmist about how statistics keep dressing up the lies so that those who ARE scared of the demographic change - keep looking and seeing the perceived danger getting no closer over time…

I refer the right honourable gentleman to the video I’ve posted above, which illustrates the point I’ve made there…

“Athiest Creep”, “Religions Community Creep”, and "Dropping out of tax without losing your vote"are all related issues to as why this country is on a slippery slope right now. If we reach actual tipping point - we’ll be like Greece in short order!

[evil8beezle]

desypete:

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

You would eat anything if there was no food to be had dogs cats foxes etc it’s because we have the luxury of being able to pick and choose what we eat that sets us apart from some countries were a dog or cat can feed a family who have nothing. Now of course there would be outrage over here should a race start to sell cats legs and chips or dog tail supreme and rightly so as we are a nation that doesn’t do that sort of thing so again it’s our values that have to come first for anyone who comes here to live just like we would have to accept there way of life should we go to there country to live

Agreed that’s it’s not in our culture so not socially acceptable. But it is in Korea, and that’s fine by me it’s in Korea!
So why do we have to turn a blind eye to animals killed in a cruel manner in this country to keep a minority happy?
Strange eh?

[carryfast]

desypete:
You would eat anything if there was no food to be had dogs cats foxes etc it’s because we have the luxury of being able to pick and choose what we eat that sets us apart from some countries were a dog or cat can feed a family who have nothing. Now of course there would be outrage over here should a race start to sell cats legs and chips or dog tail supreme and rightly so as we are a nation that doesn’t do that sort of thing so again it’s our values that have to come first for anyone who comes here to live just like we would have to accept there way of life should we go to there country to live

+1

[rjan]

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

You tell me the difference! Would you eat a child that had been reared like a pig?

The difference is ultimately whatever we say it is, but whereas I can see a dog in the street and know it’s not food without hesitation, you don’t seem to make the decision until you’ve found out how it was reared!

That has implications for how we learn to feel and relate to dogs. Besides the fact that your first impressions of the dog might be that it has tasty-looking thighs rather than cute eyes, you’re also likely to face hard cases where it’s not clear how you should feel about the dog (e.g. dogs whose rearing you aren’t familiar with, or dogs who’ve had a mixed indoor and outdoor rearing), and even cases where you get it wrong and realise you’ve eaten a house dog (or hear of such cases). And then there is the arbitrariness about which dogs receive which rearing - today’s war-medal-winning dog, could be the mother or father of tomorrow’s abattoir dogs!

It’s only by living in a society where dogs aren’t eaten at all, not even by anybody else, that we get to enjoy them so fully as friends and loyal companions. And we only really enjoy our food, when the carcass it came from was not our friend. It’s hard to occupy the middle ground, where an animal that so clearly has the potential to be a friend if we treated it as such, can also be a guilt-free meal because we have decided to treat it as such. People who can turn their guilt off at will, never have to turn it on, and if they can choose not to suffer it then why would they?

Do you have any friends, and do others have any friend in you, if you can decide at your pleasure to treat a friend as food and slaughter it without regret?

The same is true of our mutual humanity and the best qualities of the human race - it only really flowers when we’re all treating each other as friends rather than food. When we do treat each other as potential food or resources, we not only weaken the opportunity for the good feelings that arise from treating others as human, but are struck by the terror that the subjects of our appetite are (unlike the dogs and farm animals) licking their lips in kind, waiting to treat us and ours as their food.

[rjan]

Evil8Beezle:
You are basically saying because we are not a backwards nation rules by religion, we should take it up the arse in a liberal fashion, while those less evolved countries can behave intolerantly…

Yes, because it isn’t a race to the bottom between countries. You seem to be using the same logic as saying, well they take bribes in Afghanistan, so why shouldn’t British civil servants follow suit (instead of taking it up the arse and making do with a measly salary)!

Our ability to be as tolerant as we are, is a sign of our strength and stability, not weakness. It’s the same way we can afford to be tolerant of those who don’t want to live next to gasworks or tanneries - in India, the tannery is the village that the workers live in!

So what if those what were born here choose not to follow our faith and culture, they do have a choice you know!

Who is this “our” if not all the people born here? You seem to think that cultures are an attribute of places - like if you want heat, you move south, and if you want rain, then move north. But no, cultures are an attribute of humans, who can exercise any culture any where.

So as I’ve said, I reject those who claim to be the keepers of “British culture” and want to impose it on everyone else. Really, they are just little Hitlers who want to impose their particular views unilaterally and mercilessly on everyone else - today it is the opportunity to abuse and denigrate Muslims, tomorrow it will be whatever other weak minority falls in their sights. They’re the same hooligans who used to throw bricks through the windows of curry shops in the 1970s, for no better reason really than the owner was more or less defenceless and that they personally (for whatever reason) didn’t like curry or any other ‘foreign muck’, or the same chauvinists who would say women’s place is in the home (because that was a long and consistent British tradition until the 70s too).

[carryfast]

Rjan:

Evil8Beezle:

Rjan:
You show me the dog-lover who is a dog-eater, and I’ll show you the serial killer!

Well that’s rubbish then as I’m a dog lover but would eat/try dog.
Granted I wouldn’t eat my dog, but if it was reared like a pig what’s the difference?

You tell me the difference! Would you eat a child that had been reared like a pig?

The difference is ultimately whatever we say it is, but whereas I can see a dog in the street and know it’s not food without hesitation, you don’t seem to make the decision until you’ve found out how it was reared!

That has implications for how we learn to feel and relate to dogs. Besides the fact that your first impressions of the dog might be that it has tasty-looking thighs rather than cute eyes, you’re also likely to face hard cases where it’s not clear how you should feel about the dog (e.g. dogs whose rearing you aren’t familiar with, or dogs who’ve had a mixed indoor and outdoor rearing), and even cases where you get it wrong and realise you’ve eaten a house dog (or hear of such cases). And then there is the arbitrariness about which dogs receive which rearing - today’s war-medal-winning dog, could be the mother or father of tomorrow’s abattoir dogs!

It’s only by living in a society where dogs aren’t eaten at all, not even by anybody else, that we get to enjoy them so fully as friends and loyal companions. And we only really enjoy our food, when the carcass it came from was not our friend. It’s hard to occupy the middle ground, where an animal that so clearly has the potential to be a friend if we treated it as such, can also be a guilt-free meal because we have decided to treat it as such. People who can turn their guilt off at will, never have to turn it on, and if they can choose not to suffer it then why would they?

Do you have any friends, and do others have any friend in you, if you can decide at your pleasure to treat a friend as food and slaughter it without regret?

The same is true of our mutual humanity and the best qualities of the human race - it only really flowers when we’re all treating each other as friends rather than food. When we do treat each other as potential food or resources, we not only weaken the opportunity for the good feelings that arise from treating others as human, but are struck by the terror that the subjects of our appetite are (unlike the dogs and farm animals) licking their lips in kind, waiting to treat us and ours as their food.

Blimey you’ve made a leap there from Korean v Brit attitudes to eating dogs to the issue of cannibalism among humans.

[rjan]

desypete:
You would eat anything if there was no food to be had dogs cats foxes etc it’s because we have the luxury of being able to pick and choose what we eat that sets us apart from some countries

I would not say it is a certainty that I would sooner eat a pet dog than have us both starve to death. Humans have convictions that they will die by as well as live by. It’s why people get over the top on command and run at machineguns, or are tortured to death by the enemy without disclosing information, because some principles and causes are more important, some ways of life too essential to trade in a Faustian pact for another bite of food or another day of breath.

It’s also by recognising and affirming our convictions that we take appropriate steps to avoid the need to confront them. I always take a packed lunch, rather than assuming I have enough food to survive whenever the dog’s with me. And I certainly don’t take any interest in how a dog might be slaughtered and dissected, because in my hungry, weakened state, that lack of familiarity with how it may be done may be enough to deter me from trying.

[carryfast]

Rjan:

Evil8Beezle:
You are basically saying because we are not a backwards nation rules by religion, we should take it up the arse in a liberal fashion, while those less evolved countries can behave intolerantly…

Yes, because it isn’t a race to the bottom between countries. You seem to be using the same logic as saying, well they take bribes in Afghanistan, so why shouldn’t British civil servants follow suit (instead of taking it up the arse and making do with a measly salary)!

Our ability to be as tolerant as we are, is a sign of our strength and stability, not weakness. It’s the same way we can afford to be tolerant of those who don’t want to live next to gasworks or tanneries - in India, the tannery is the village that the workers live in!

So what if those what were born here choose not to follow our faith and culture, they do have a choice you know!

Who is this “our” if not all the people born here? You seem to think that cultures are an attribute of places - like if you want heat, you move south, and if you want rain, then move north. But no, cultures are an attribute of humans, who can exercise any culture any where.

So as I’ve said, I reject those who claim to be the keepers of “British culture” and want to impose it on everyone else. Really, they are just little Hitlers who want to impose their particular views unilaterally and mercilessly on everyone else - today it is the opportunity to abuse and denigrate Muslims, tomorrow it will be whatever other weak minority falls in their sights. They’re the same hooligans who used to throw bricks through the windows of curry shops in the 1970s, for no better reason really than the owner was more or less defenceless and that they personally (for whatever reason) didn’t like curry or any other ‘foreign muck’, or the same chauvinists who would say women’s place is in the home (because that was a long and consistent British tradition until the 70s too).

More Socialist bs.

No one is saying impose British culture on everyone else.What’s being said is that there are ( rightly ) limits to the tolerance that immigrant communities have the right to expect when transferring ‘their’ culture to our country.While it’s bleedin hypocritical of them ( and the bleeding heart Socialists ) to expect more tolerance from others than that which they are willing to show others in return.

As for curry restaurants being vandalised in the 1970’s no I don’t remember that.But I do remember naively and innocently getting caught up in one of the regular inter ethnic flare ups involving Asians v both each other and the indigenous community while attending college in the Hounslow area as part of my job in Feltham.Only escaping,some of the even sword wielding nutters, having been warned by workmates of the impending danger with them,unlike myself,having the luxury of having grown up and living in the place.Unlike myself and one or two others only knowing life growing up and living in the indigenous heartlands of the Surrey Greater London border.

As for a woman’s place being in the home.No surprise that you’d prefer the Red Army idea of putting them into front line armed service duty instead.While no doubt ignoring the idea of women first off a sinking ship in favour of gender equality.

On that note remind us what EU membership gender equality did for women’s pension rights here.

[the-snowman]

How the hell did it get from a knocked back application for a butchers shop to whether we would eat a jack russell and chips?