david_carnell

Please don't compare them. Politically, socially and historically the comparison doesn't hold up. It's merely a lazy tool used to increase rhetoric on both sides of the debate. Whilst EU status will give the BNP more funding and publicity it will also bring it under greater scrutiny. Only today I read that their membership policy could well be illegal, given that it discriminates on matters of race and religion, and thus under EU law they could be prosecuted. This could be a short and pyrrhic victory for the BNP. Exposure of their abhorrent nature is the best way to combat them, along with strong rebuttals against what they stand for.

Sopers on Nunhead Lane for those not trying to type on an iPhone keyboard ;-)

I would agree with you ???? and say immigration is an "issue" (i.e. a problem - let's not try and obscure what you mean here) with a large number of people in this country - in nearly every sector of society, from 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants themselves all the way to the "metropop middle classes". And I would say it is for two reasons: 1) Lack of understanding of the issues 2) Fear of the unknown/new/different As a brief example of 1) the common confusion over the difference between refugees and economic migrants is one that is repeatedly found, both in the tabloid press, and re-spouted by the man-on-the-street. I don't think the political nature of the EU however is a reason for any of this. The economic free-trade area of the EEC allowed freedom for workers to move across Europe as they pleased and is now generally accepted, by all except a minority fringe, as a useful and beneficial body for the UK to belong to. The political nature of the EU has nothing to do with it. And let's be honest here, when we talk about issues concerning immigration/racism/national identity etc we (and by we I mean those who have problems with the above) are talking about immigrants from non-European parts of the world - i.e. non-white people. I think you're assumption that Labour has ignored the white working class holds some weight. Whilst they have, without doubt imo, improved the lot of the working man and the benefit-reliant sections of society with measures such as the national minimum wage, SureStart and better maternity rights they have failed to address the underlying poverty gap that exists between the richest and poorest sectors. When Peter Mandleson once said he was "relaxed" about people being stinking rich in a society which still has children living in poverty the death knell sounded for the Old Labour movement and the chance to enact a truly social-democratic model of government. They have been wasted years to some extent. And because of this, I believe Labour must take some of the blame for the relative success of the BNP and the continued undercurrent of racism and bigotry that persists in the UK. Hopefully this has commented on some of your points and raised a few more. I am interested in one particular point however. I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you are essentially a libertarian. Free-market, small state etc. Surely the free movement of labour across national boundaries would be a pivotal tenet of your beliefs. If imported labour can do the job cheaper then so be it?

I can't make it I'm afraid but thanks for thinking of me.

Without wishing to put words in *Bob*'s mouth, a penal system that does nothing but lock up crims isn't going to foster a progressive society. In fact, in the long-term it is counter-productive. To use a rubbish metaphor, think of crime as an infection on the limb of the human body. The "lock 'em up and throw away the key" technique is akin to amputation. It solves the problem but at great expense and long term detriment to the body as a whole (or society in this case). It's my belief that greater emphasis on tackling the causes of crime and more resources given to rehabilitation, which I would like to key-hole surgery or antibiotics, whilst expensive and needing greater expertise in their execution are, in the long-term, much more effective.

You're welcome Charlie. I'm afraid my knowledge of all things piscine doesn't extend to breeding seasons and the like. However the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) publishes all the info needed here. Below I've listed the fish that should not be eaten at all and are most endangered. The following is a list of fish available to the UK and European consumer which have been given a rating of 5 and which MCS believes are most vulnerable to over-fishing and/or are fished using methods which cause damage to the environment or non-target species. The list is in alphabetical order not order of threat or impact. 1. Alfonsinos or golden eye perch 2. Anchovy (from Bay of Biscay) 3. Anglerfish or monkfish or goosefish (from North and Northwest Spain and Portuguese coast) 4. Argentine or greater silver smelt 5. Black Scabbardfish (from all areas except the Portuguese coast) 6. Blue ling 7. Brill (from all areas except Baltic Sea) 8. Chilean seabass or Patagonian toothfish (from all areas except the South Georgia fishery) 9. Cod, Atlantic (Wild caught from all areas except Northeast Arctic, Iceland, and Western Channel, Bristol Channel, Southeast Ireland and Sole) 10. Dogfish or spurdog or rock salmon or flake 11. Dublin Bay Prawn or langoustine or scampi (from Spain and Portugal) 12. Eel, conger 13. Eel, European 14. Escolar or snake mackerel 15. Greater forkbeard 16. Grouper 17. Haddock (from the Faroes and West of Scotland fisheries) 18. Hake, European (Southern stock) 19. Halibut, Atlantic (Wild Caught) 20. Halibut, Greenland (from Northwest Atlantic and Greenland, Iceland, West of Scotland and Azores) 21. Herring or sild (from West of Scotland, West Ireland, and Great Sole fisheries) 22. Ling (except handline caught from the Faroes) 23. Lobster, American (from Southern New England stocks) 24. Marlin, black 25. Marlin, blue (from Atlantic longline and purse seine fisheries) 26. Marlin, Indo-Pacific blue 27. Marlin, white 28. Nursehound (from Bay of Biscay and Iberian stocks) 29. Orange roughy 30. Parrotfish 31. Picarel 32. Plaice (from the Western Channel, Celtic Sea, Southwest Ireland and West of Ireland stocks) 33. Plaice, American or long rough dab 34. Prawn, tiger (except organically farmed) 35. Ratfish or rabbitfish 36. Ray, blonde 37. Ray, sandy 38. Ray, shagreen 39. Ray, smalleyed (from Bay of Biscay and Iberian stocks) 40. Ray, thornback or roker (from Bay of Biscay and Iberian stocks) 41. Ray, undulate 42. Red or blackspot seabream 43. Redfish or ocean perch 44. Roundnose grenadier 45. Salmon, Atlantic (Wild Caught) 46. Seabass (Pelagic Trawl only) 47. Shark, leafscale gulper 48. Shark, mako 49. Shark, porbeagle 50. Shark, siki or Portuguese dogfish 51. Shark, tope 52. Skate, common 53. Skate, longnose 54. Skate, Norwegain or black 55. Skate, white 56. Snapper, cubera 57. Snapper, mutton 58. Snapper, northern red 59. Sole, Dover or common (from North Sea and Irish Sea) 60. Starry smoothhound (from Bay of Biscay and Iberian stocks) 61. Sturgeon, caviar (Wild Caught) 62. Swordfish (Longline and Gillnet fisheries in Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, and Central and Western Pacific) 63. Tuna, albacore (Longline and Trawl caught from the North and South Atlantic and the Mediterranean) 64. Tuna, bigeye 65. Tuna, northern bluefin 66. Tuna, Pacific bluefin 67. Tuna, southern bluefin 68. Turbot (Wild caught) 69. Tusk or torsk

The following is a list of fish available to the UK and European consumer which have been given a rating of 1 or 2 and which MCS believes are fished within sustainable levels using methods which do not cause unacceptable damage to the environment or non-target species. The list is in alphabetical order not in order of sustainability. 1. Abalone (farmed only) 2. Alaska or walleye pollock (MSC certified) 3. Bib or pouting 4. Black bream or porgy or seabream (from Cornwall and NW and N Wales) 5. Brown crab (pot caught off S Devon coast) 6. Cape hake (MSC certified from S Africa) 7. Clam, American hardshell (from hand-gathered farmed sources only) 8. Clam, carpet shell (hand-gathered only) 9. Cockle (MSC certified from Bury Inlet, SW Wales) 10. Cod, Atlantic (Organically farmed) 11. Cod, Pacific (MSC certified) 12. Coley or saithe (from NE Arctic and combined N Sea stock) 13. Dab 14. Dover sole (MSC certified from Eastern Channel) 15. Flounder (from Cornwall and NW and N Wales) 16. Gurnard (grey and red) 17. Halibut, Pacific (MSC certified) 18. Herring or sild (MSC certified from Thames Blackwater, North Sea and Eastern English Channel) 19. Lemon sole (otter trawl or seine net caught) 20. Lobster, Mexican Baja California red rock (MSC certified) 21. Lobster, Western Australian rock (MSC certified) 22. Lythe or pollack (line caught and tagged from Cornwall) 23. Mackerel (MSC certified from Cornwall) 24. Mahi Mahi (handline caught from targeted fisheries only) 25. Mussel (sustainably harvested or farmed e.g. rope grown) 26. Oyster (native & Pacific, sustainably farmed) 27. Pilchard or sardine, European (traditionally harvested from Cornwall) 28. Red mullet (not from Mediterranean) 29. Salmon, Atlantic (Organically farmed) 30. Salmon, Pacific (MSC certified from Alaska) 31. Scallop (sustainably harvested e.g. dive-caught) 32. Scampi or Dublin Bay prawn (MSC certified from Loch Torridon, NW Scotland (not available in UK) 33. Scampi or Dublin Bay prawn (pot-caught from West of Scotland) 34. Seabass (line-caught and tagged from Cornwall) 35. Snapper, Red or Crimson 36. Spider crab (pot caught only) 37. Tilapia (sustainably farmed) 38. Trout (brown or sea and rainbow, Organically farmed) 39. Tuna, albacore (pole and line, handline or troll-caught from S Pacific or S Atlantic) 40. Tuna, skipjack (pole and line or handline-caught from Pacific (western & central) or Maldives) 41. Tuna, yellowfin (pole and line, handline or troll-caught from Pacific (western & central) or Atlantic) 42. Whiting (from English Channel) 43. Winkle (sustainably harvested e g. hand picked)

???? used the example of stronger sentencing for knife crime - a popular media issue, especially in London. In recent years, continuous and repeated crack-downs and amnesties have been launched against knives and those who carry them. But interestingly Now, the first sentence would suggestone of the following: that these measures are having little success in lowering knife crime; that knife crime isn't as rife as the media would lead us to believe; or that these measures are keeping a lid on things and stopping the situation deteriorating. But the second sentence suggests that knife crime is actually falling in recent years, which imo suggests a few possibilities: that still further stronger punishment is unnecessary as current methods are working; that media publicised and public backed campaigns are a more potent weapon; or lastly that if crackdowns were even harsher then the drop in crime would be more dramatic. Or none of the above as police statistics that feed into the BCS are unreliable.

Where did I say my opinion was more worthy? I even asked what yours was... but still you prefer schoolboy tactics of insulting your detractor. ...and that's my point. I disagree with lots of people on here (TLS, ????, MamoraMan) but at least their arguments are jsut that - arguments. Not pointles outbursts of swearing and anger. I haven't insulted anyone with terms like "bellend" either - only you've steeped that low - or worse given your previous form. Either grow up, contribute something mature that adds to the debate or piss off.

Tony - on this rare occasion we are in agreement. A good summary. Atila - you're anger must have blinded you to the obvious. Football violence was used as an example of tough policing and stiff sentencing as an answer to crime. Something you seem to advocate in between your spit-flecked rants. Others feel the picture is more complicated and that draconian punishments are not the most useful way for society to progress. Now, your opinion is always welcome but try to contribute more than a sweary version of a Sun headline or just go back to the football thread and picking fights in pub car parks.

So what we are saying is that if only everyone was as smart as football hooligans (coupled with draconian sentencing of course) no one would commit crimes? Feckin' genius.

Yes, children. That's what I wads getting at when I talked about an ageing membership and difficulty in recruiting new members. You don't fancy getting a black eye or a couple of busted ribs with a wife and nipper at home. I would also heavily link violence, both in football and in society at large, to economic prosperity of a country. Ergo recession = hooliganism.

Keef - how is it "superior" of me to find excessive patriotism unnecessary and unpleasant. Whilst England games in pubs can be great it's not a rarity for it to descend into displays of xenophobia. And the Leeds comparison doesn't hold up - I can choose what club to support. Tony - both, but primarily 1.

Ahh "a Sky documentary" - the ultimate source of authority on all matters concerning football hooliganism and it's continued glamourisation. It wasn't presented by Danny "Diamond Geez" Dyer was it? Like I said Tony, I'm willing to believe that stiffer sentences had a part to play (although I doubt it tells the whole story) in this particular example but I don't think it's a useful enough example to use for society in general.

Can it not be assumed that as I'm English and a sports fan I'll support my national team without having to resort to mawkish flag-waving to prove my worth?

As a millwall fan I'm sure you've witnessed football violence, hooliganism and racism at first hand. It is a credit to the game that people like yourself refused to bow to fringe elements and committed to remove them from the terraces. Incidents like Hillsborough and Heysel led to a public outcry over fan behaviour at football grounds. Coupled with increased police presence at trouble games and increased arrests, over time the rate of crime dropped. I would also summise that a difficulty in recruiting new members, an ageing membership of crews and a new professionalism that occured with the advent of the Premier League were all factors in declining violence. Whilst this is an interesting example and whilst I believe the success was in part due to more aggressive policing I'm not convinced it can be extrapolated to society as a whole.

Jeremy, in this particular example, I think it unlikely that these people would ever be deemed safe for release. This thread had drifted off into a wider debate on crime and punishment so I felt the need to state a more generalised conviction.

Oh for the love of god Tony - is there any chance of having an argument with you that isn't based on anecdote? "I've met some real villans in my time thus I am an auhority on crime" That's the best you can come up with? OK I'll play - my brother and sister-in-law both used to work as prison wardens and became convinced that hardline regimes in prisons did nothing but brutalize inmates, make them resent the society that sent them there, neglected the opportunity to rehabilitate offenders and thus were more likely to reoffend upon release. But that's just anecdote. I'm sure you could challenge it with "well my mate Steve worked in a prison. And he thinks different". Do you see what I mean? I don't commit a crime, not because of the sentence I'd be given, but because I know it's wrong. If someone is incapable of making that judgement then I don't think tougher and tougher jail terms will make much difference.

Ooooh a sly dig at a months old post which you misunderstood in the first place Tony - good work - but pointless in relation to this. Yet again you've ignored the larger issues to focus your laser beam argument on something irrelevent. Whether I'll be wiser in 50 years than I am now is besides the point, although the answer is probably yes. Whether you being older than other posters makes your argument more or less valid is the crux though. And of course the answer is that it does not. You are right or wrong based on the weight of your argument not because you've been alive longer than someone else. So if you'd care to get back to the matter in hand...

Tony - I would be careful of branding other posters (ie Sean) as patronising if you want to avoid allegations of hypocrisy. Your argument of "you'll change your mind when you get to my age" is both wrong and frankly insulting to a large number of posters on this forum, myself included. Wisdom comes with knowledge not age. If you cannot provide anything other than this anecdotal nonsense as a coherent argument for a more hardline law&order platform then this argument will go nowhere. Show me facts, examples and evidence - not some hyperbole about "other" websites or how marvellous Britain was in 1968. You've been directly challenged to look at societies with low violent crime rates (Scandanavia and Saudi) and draw conclusions. Instead you obfuscate with pointless rhetoric about dogs with three legs and criminals laughing in the faces of "liberal do-gooders". Either engage properly like the "wise old man" you attempt to portray yourself as or don't, but don't try and pour petrol on the fire needlessly. I'll engage with you all you want. I'm not afraid to be a liberal nor see it as a dirty word. I'm proud to see the best in people, to give the benefit of the doubt and to believe rehabilitation not punishment is more likely to succeed.

*hangs head in shame* *awaits sarcastic comment from the resident Saffa*

Alan Johnson would be my choice. I like Ed Miliband a lot but he's too young and inexperienced. John Reid is out. No way would the public have another dour Scot in No10. Blears isn't popular enough with the rank and file, ditto Blunkett. Harman would be a good outside bet but I'd want better odds than 6-1. She was dismissed too easily in the Deputy Leader elections and any other candidates would underestimate her again at their peril.

Australia set to make an announcement on a "player-related" issue at 1300 BST Any guesses? I'm going for a positive drug test but I couldn't say who. Edit - ahhh, perhaps not.

PGC - I'm afraid Mockers is probably correct. If there was a string of Dutch or French Shane Warne's out there the English clubs would field teams of them. But because there are not, you are able to limit the number of non-EEC players. The Premiership could do that. Only two non-EU players for example. It would stop the poaching of young talent from Brazil/Argentina et al at 16 only to sit on the reserves bench for years and then be carted off back home when you don't make it. Squad limitations seem a sensible suggestion. It keeps costs down, increases the chance of youth team players making a breakthrough in a workload heavy season and stops needless transfers a la Sidwell/Johnson et al to Chelsea where talent wastes away. The only downside I forsee is that Premiership teams would be more reluctant to farm out young players on long term loans to lower division clubs in case of urgent recall. But it seems a small price to pay.

Oh, and as well as that, I went to a cracking little gig last night. It was held at the 100 Club on Oxford Street, which I'd never been to before. A little hot inside due to the abnormally warm weather but it's a decent space with seating and standing areas. The bar was a little pricey but, hey, you are on Oxford Street. I saw a Fence Collective gig headlined by King Creosote. The warm-up acts of Player Piano and Pictish Trail were both very good, especially the latter, whilst KC went down a storm. This guy really deserves a much bigger audience than he gets and I'd advise you all to check out his latest (and 7th album) Flicking The V's if you can. His back catalogue is also fantastic. Scottish folk-pop/rock with a dash of electronica now and again. Lovely. A taster below: