Imperial College London
London
This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Cold mother
- Vet farm work experience
- What should I wear to theory test?
- Is this boy just flirting with me or does he like me
- Does Cambridge University accept resits?
- My Shoulder Hurts When I Laugh !
- MPhil in Basic and Translational Neuroscience at Uni of Cambridge
- Can someone give this Q5 a mark out of 40 please. .
- Is the UK prepared for WW3?
- year 13 feb mock
- UCAS amended decision
- Consultant sued NHS after being told to roll up sleeves like other doctors
- Anyone else feels uncomfortable in revealing clothes?
- Mphil Genomic medicine Cambridge 2024 interviews
- Ucl eee 2023
- Has anyone been involved in a level malpractice?
- Discontinued favourite foods or snacks.
- Am I still a virgin?
- Whats the most stupid rule your school has?
- The 'What Are You Wearing Today' Thread
Omg why did they get rid of the coat of arms (officially)?!
Scroll to see replies
love2learn7
well i personally believe a private pupil gets a far greater education. without playing those stupid "if" games about the state pupil (ie a state pupil has made the best of a worst situation- the fact is they're still lower in standard) - the private student is on average better taught and will find university much easier!
its the governments job to raise state education to the level that people will not opt for private education (also a task that is impossible economically)!
its the governments job to raise state education to the level that people will not opt for private education (also a task that is impossible economically)!
i was bitching more about oxbridge favouring private school applicants purely because they're from private schools (imperial seem to do this to some extent too).
also, i hate the fact that if you're royalty or the son/daughter of some big politician, you've got a place set for you at oxbridge...and then subsequently a part of "the old boys network" and "the oxbridge maffia"
the "if" games (although i disagree with that title) are better. it's better to have someone who's capable of being taught, someone bright, someone intelligent rather than someone who can jump through hoops and pass exams, which is what a private school teaches you to do
love2learn7
thats complete tosh!
a group of people who messed around at school and subsequently scrounge off of the rest of us doesnt constitute as tradition! It means that their offspring will be scroungers and most likely so too will the next generation of that family.
i would gladly "piss" on anyone that cannot be bothered to get some standard qualifications because they're too lazy, knowing that they will still be paid in the end!
by the way name-calling is really getting your point across!
a group of people who messed around at school and subsequently scrounge off of the rest of us doesnt constitute as tradition! It means that their offspring will be scroungers and most likely so too will the next generation of that family.
i would gladly "piss" on anyone that cannot be bothered to get some standard qualifications because they're too lazy, knowing that they will still be paid in the end!
by the way name-calling is really getting your point across!
clearly you need a history lesson. i recommend looking up what happened in british politics after WW2. in short, the amazing attlee lab govt set up the welfare state and it was a great british tradition..something the tories didnt even mess with until that half-man, half-horse creature they called thatcher came in. so yes, you have previously pissed on a great british tradition.
it's not just about people "scrounging" off the rest of us with all their subsequent generations being scroungers. that's the royal family.
you still haven't told me when you think change is acceptable? why isn't it right to campaign for change? and who is truly british enough to campaign for change? just because your parents were not born in britain, does this mean you cant speak out against what you see to be an injustice against your nation?
name-calling is because you're too thick/arrogant/blindsighted to accept facts and just keep ramming your head into a brick wall like the idiot that you are. you pretty much prove that intelligence and the ability to pass exams are independent qualities and you can have one without the other (guess which way round it is for you).
Imperial College London
London
Good debate, but can you both please do it in PM or meet somewhere to discuss politics/welfare state/life. After all you both go to the same uni! This constant throwing of handbags is getting boring now.
love2learn7
I think that Britain would be a very boring un-characteristic country if we changed. Whats the difference between all those ex-soviet countries - answer - nothing. They're mostly all the same and they dont have anything unique. We have such a rich history, culture, society, heritage etc and i think its important to preserve those aspects which do not get in the way of improving our quality of life (that said- building a motorway through a field still isnt clever even if it will cut down driving time lol).
change is constant. get used to it.
just like south africa changed by getting rid of apartheid and just like the US abolished slavery.
just like britain ended it's rule in india.
change isn't always bad. don't be so afraid of it.
well done on dodging all the other points. at least you know when you've lost.
sorry tuppatopbrer - this guy just gets on my nerves and i like shooting down his points. are you the guy opposite me on beit west 2nd?
Estonia and Tajikistan. No difference. You thick ****ing ****.
here here zertrudetrout
you know, people who often say, "i'm not racist but..." are often saying something racist. i mean, if you didnt think it was racist, you wouldnt have to say "im not racist"
okay how about this point. you're always moaning about people leeching off tax payers money, not doing work and then their kids end up like that. isn't that the definition of the royal family?
you know, people who often say, "i'm not racist but..." are often saying something racist. i mean, if you didnt think it was racist, you wouldnt have to say "im not racist"
okay how about this point. you're always moaning about people leeching off tax payers money, not doing work and then their kids end up like that. isn't that the definition of the royal family?
Ok first off, since this thread is about the coat of arms I should say that I'm in favour of Imperial keeping it since it represents the history and heritage of the college. I fail to see how it could possibly annoy anyone to see a coat of arms associated with Imperial, I'd have thought that the name "Imperial" College would have been more of an issue.
Right then, the Monarchy. Once upon a time the Monarch held supreme power, which has slowly diminished over time into what we have today. True they are unelected, in a sense they do support themselves from the public and I have no doubt that there are many other questionable activities associated with them. However they are there for a reason. The Queen, doesn't just sit around kicking her heels waiting for Death. She has a very very important role in our nation, the role of figurehead. Ironically, part of what she does is to compensate for Blair, and give a different impression of what Britain is to the rest of the world. She represents what we want Britain to be (perhaps what it used to be). Without the Monarchy I can imagine Britain turning into something scarily like America, an unpleasant prospect.
Talk about the Monarch being virtually powerless is becoming truer and truer. There was a time when the Monarch could write laws, make decisions and affect the course of the country. What followed was a governing system of 3 parts: Commons, Lords and Monarch. A new law had to be agreed upon by the House of Commons, it then had to pass through the Lords and ultimately be signed and endorsed by the Monarch. Then came the "Parliament Act" which effectively meant that the Commons could force a law through the Lords if they rejected it a certain number of times. Our Labour government have made frequent use of this Act to get their way. The Monarch theoretically still has the power to block the Commons which, to me at least, is somewhat reassuring. The Monarchy is no more parasitical than Parliament, it is merely another step in a democratic government to maintain high standards of government.
I went to a private school (I'll bring this up again later, there seems to be a lot of consternation about private schools in these threads!) for my whole school life (all 14 years of it). There was an awful lot of tradition, pomp and circumstance and so forth, with which I grew up, and as such it became part of my life. During those 14 years a lot changed, and I had to change with too. My argument is this: Change is not a bad thing, it is what drives us to become better, but change without familiarty and an element of consistency is feared. Those traditions at school didn't change, but a lot changed around them. Returning to those roots is a strong force to maintain the point of the whole thing. The Monarchy provides exactly this "strong foundation" upon which our nation is built.
But who can call for change? This is a very difficult topic to discuss because there are so many people out there who are so quick to jump on the "racist" bandwagon. I should first point out that I consider myself British, English in fact, but in fact I am half Hungarian. My father is English and his ancestry is as well, but my mother is entirely Hungarian. Believe me when I say that I am not racist, as I have no right to be, so everything that follows is observation rather than racism. The issue is about choice. I was born here and as such I have no choice about living here. That is the way things are. I therefore believe I have the right to voice my opinions, as coherently as I can, and expect others not to ignore me. This government and its choices directly affect my life (let's not even get started on top up fees) so if I want to complain I shall. I would, however, start getting annoyed if someone who chose to immgrate here then started slagging off the government. If you don't like the way it's done here, then no one's forcing you to live here.
This leads me on to something love2learn7 said, and I have to agree with him: "if a christian went to a muslim country, the christian would respect the culture of that country and cover themselves, so why do you come here and demand to change our culture?" England is a predominantly Christian country, and as such we are under no obligation to change our ways to conform to any other religion. I fully agree with freedom of speech and so forth, but there is a limit. I remember hearing on the news that a shopping centre (in Birmingham I believe, though I could be mistaken) was forced to remove its Christmas decorations because they were disrespectful to the Muslim community. Similarly, at Christmas, the majority of cards now say "Happy Holidays", rather than "Merry Christmas". I don't want to wish someone a happy holiday, I want to wish them a Merry Christmas. Outside religious practises are fine in private, and should be encouraged as far as possible, but I don't particularly want to see a woman walking down the street two paces behind her husband - subjugation of women should not permitted in Britain, regardless of race, colour or creed.
The whole point here is integration. My grandmother immigrated from Hungary in the fifties, after the war (legally, I might add) and immediately made every effort to integrate. She did not go around wearing traditional Hungarian clothes, neither did she ask the government to print every single leaflet in every Hungarian as well, simply because she couldn't speak English. She learnt English. This is integration - if you want to live here you should accept that the main language is English, the main religion is Christianity (on this point, I am of course not implying that immigrants should convert, only that they should respect the local customs and belief system). If these two criteria are upheld then I am quite happy for foreigners to live and work here. I don't want flames about how I'm a racist, I'm not. If I were racist I'd be a hypocrite, since my background stems partly from another "race" other than English.
Anyway I digress (apologies if this is getting rather long and rant-like, I have a lot of free time on my hands this weekend!) Ok back onto the private school thing I touched upon. I don't think that I am necessarily better educated that someone who went to a state school, but neither is it true that we were taught how to jump through hoops to pass exams. Quite the opposite. In fact there were many times during GCSEs when I did rather worse than I should have done precisely because I didn't know how to jump through the hoops! (needless to say I learned by A level!)
Regarding the welfare state, I almost find myself agreeing with love2learn7 again (sorry switchday, it's nothing personal), partly because I live within about 2 miles of him so I know what he's talking about. I agree that it is a very good system for those who deserve to use it, and it was a tremendous leap forward for our society, but there are many who abuse it. Before anyone thinks of saying, "well you went to a private school, you must be rich, how can you talk?", I should point out that my going to that school resulted in us being rather poor. I remember people on my road, whose children went to state school, having expensive televisions and redecorating their houses every year, while I went to school. Whether this has been advantageous to me I can't say, but that's the way it happened. Whether this is representative of the country I can't say.
About all former soviet countries being the same, this is actually true to a certain extent. The iron curtain collapsed in 1989, and I remember what Hungary was like just a few years later when I was there. I went back last summer and was shocked at how much they had embraced capitalism, and I believe others have followed a similar suit. Clearly there are differences between Estonia and Tajikistan, but these are cultural rather than a direct result of Communism.
I think I'm going to leave that there, I make no apologies for it being so heavy, because it was. It's hard to force humour into these types of topics!
To sum up: we should keep the coat of arms!
Right then, the Monarchy. Once upon a time the Monarch held supreme power, which has slowly diminished over time into what we have today. True they are unelected, in a sense they do support themselves from the public and I have no doubt that there are many other questionable activities associated with them. However they are there for a reason. The Queen, doesn't just sit around kicking her heels waiting for Death. She has a very very important role in our nation, the role of figurehead. Ironically, part of what she does is to compensate for Blair, and give a different impression of what Britain is to the rest of the world. She represents what we want Britain to be (perhaps what it used to be). Without the Monarchy I can imagine Britain turning into something scarily like America, an unpleasant prospect.
Talk about the Monarch being virtually powerless is becoming truer and truer. There was a time when the Monarch could write laws, make decisions and affect the course of the country. What followed was a governing system of 3 parts: Commons, Lords and Monarch. A new law had to be agreed upon by the House of Commons, it then had to pass through the Lords and ultimately be signed and endorsed by the Monarch. Then came the "Parliament Act" which effectively meant that the Commons could force a law through the Lords if they rejected it a certain number of times. Our Labour government have made frequent use of this Act to get their way. The Monarch theoretically still has the power to block the Commons which, to me at least, is somewhat reassuring. The Monarchy is no more parasitical than Parliament, it is merely another step in a democratic government to maintain high standards of government.
I went to a private school (I'll bring this up again later, there seems to be a lot of consternation about private schools in these threads!) for my whole school life (all 14 years of it). There was an awful lot of tradition, pomp and circumstance and so forth, with which I grew up, and as such it became part of my life. During those 14 years a lot changed, and I had to change with too. My argument is this: Change is not a bad thing, it is what drives us to become better, but change without familiarty and an element of consistency is feared. Those traditions at school didn't change, but a lot changed around them. Returning to those roots is a strong force to maintain the point of the whole thing. The Monarchy provides exactly this "strong foundation" upon which our nation is built.
But who can call for change? This is a very difficult topic to discuss because there are so many people out there who are so quick to jump on the "racist" bandwagon. I should first point out that I consider myself British, English in fact, but in fact I am half Hungarian. My father is English and his ancestry is as well, but my mother is entirely Hungarian. Believe me when I say that I am not racist, as I have no right to be, so everything that follows is observation rather than racism. The issue is about choice. I was born here and as such I have no choice about living here. That is the way things are. I therefore believe I have the right to voice my opinions, as coherently as I can, and expect others not to ignore me. This government and its choices directly affect my life (let's not even get started on top up fees) so if I want to complain I shall. I would, however, start getting annoyed if someone who chose to immgrate here then started slagging off the government. If you don't like the way it's done here, then no one's forcing you to live here.
This leads me on to something love2learn7 said, and I have to agree with him: "if a christian went to a muslim country, the christian would respect the culture of that country and cover themselves, so why do you come here and demand to change our culture?" England is a predominantly Christian country, and as such we are under no obligation to change our ways to conform to any other religion. I fully agree with freedom of speech and so forth, but there is a limit. I remember hearing on the news that a shopping centre (in Birmingham I believe, though I could be mistaken) was forced to remove its Christmas decorations because they were disrespectful to the Muslim community. Similarly, at Christmas, the majority of cards now say "Happy Holidays", rather than "Merry Christmas". I don't want to wish someone a happy holiday, I want to wish them a Merry Christmas. Outside religious practises are fine in private, and should be encouraged as far as possible, but I don't particularly want to see a woman walking down the street two paces behind her husband - subjugation of women should not permitted in Britain, regardless of race, colour or creed.
The whole point here is integration. My grandmother immigrated from Hungary in the fifties, after the war (legally, I might add) and immediately made every effort to integrate. She did not go around wearing traditional Hungarian clothes, neither did she ask the government to print every single leaflet in every Hungarian as well, simply because she couldn't speak English. She learnt English. This is integration - if you want to live here you should accept that the main language is English, the main religion is Christianity (on this point, I am of course not implying that immigrants should convert, only that they should respect the local customs and belief system). If these two criteria are upheld then I am quite happy for foreigners to live and work here. I don't want flames about how I'm a racist, I'm not. If I were racist I'd be a hypocrite, since my background stems partly from another "race" other than English.
Anyway I digress (apologies if this is getting rather long and rant-like, I have a lot of free time on my hands this weekend!) Ok back onto the private school thing I touched upon. I don't think that I am necessarily better educated that someone who went to a state school, but neither is it true that we were taught how to jump through hoops to pass exams. Quite the opposite. In fact there were many times during GCSEs when I did rather worse than I should have done precisely because I didn't know how to jump through the hoops! (needless to say I learned by A level!)
Regarding the welfare state, I almost find myself agreeing with love2learn7 again (sorry switchday, it's nothing personal), partly because I live within about 2 miles of him so I know what he's talking about. I agree that it is a very good system for those who deserve to use it, and it was a tremendous leap forward for our society, but there are many who abuse it. Before anyone thinks of saying, "well you went to a private school, you must be rich, how can you talk?", I should point out that my going to that school resulted in us being rather poor. I remember people on my road, whose children went to state school, having expensive televisions and redecorating their houses every year, while I went to school. Whether this has been advantageous to me I can't say, but that's the way it happened. Whether this is representative of the country I can't say.
About all former soviet countries being the same, this is actually true to a certain extent. The iron curtain collapsed in 1989, and I remember what Hungary was like just a few years later when I was there. I went back last summer and was shocked at how much they had embraced capitalism, and I believe others have followed a similar suit. Clearly there are differences between Estonia and Tajikistan, but these are cultural rather than a direct result of Communism.
I think I'm going to leave that there, I make no apologies for it being so heavy, because it was. It's hard to force humour into these types of topics!
To sum up: we should keep the coat of arms!
love2learn7
thick- i assure you i have plenty more A grades at A Level than you, i taught the hardest ones myself and i also have more academic scholarships than the total number of schools you've attended!
i was actually referring to estonia, lithuania, latvia and ukraine you stupid prick, not every f'ing country the USSR had ever owned!
You feeling insecure about your intelligence or something?? You really made yourself look a prat stretching that far to make me feel stupid (which you didnt). I could be pompous and pedantic if i liked but im not that sad....
btw you're boring me now
i was actually referring to estonia, lithuania, latvia and ukraine you stupid prick, not every f'ing country the USSR had ever owned!
You feeling insecure about your intelligence or something?? You really made yourself look a prat stretching that far to make me feel stupid (which you didnt). I could be pompous and pedantic if i liked but im not that sad....
btw you're boring me now
academia is far from the be all and end all of intelligence. if you were referring to the baltic states why not say so? ooh you taught yourself a-levels, bet you feel proud. shame youre so bitter against the average man, get bullied at school or something?
oh and i think my lithuanian friend might have something to say about your generalisations of the culture of that part of the world.
oh and every time someone calls you a **** you say how immature name calling is, but you do it with no reason whatsoever.
typical imperial stereotype geek.
For **** sake, this is getting beyond a joke. If you still insist on having a debate then go ahead (make a new topic please, as the question on thread title has still not been answerd, and I would like to know the answer) but its getting childish when some forum members are just insulting the institution/political party/race/people they are debating against.
Switchday, indeed I am the guy opposite you at beit, you are sharing arent you? I tried talking to 'you' but it was your roomate. I still havent seen you I dont think?
Regarding change, its simple, without change there is no progress. You name me one system be it political or whatever which hasnt changed, but has still progressed, and I will eat my words.
love2learn7, your gloating spree about your 7 A's wasnt needed, has changed my opinion of you a tad but Im sure you dont care about that.
Nice post ashy although I disagree with a few things mentioned. Indeed a christian would probably have to adapt to respect the muslim religion. However one could argue that most if not all muslim countries are not as advanced as the christian (Western countries) and such countries have advanced to a stage where they can accommodate other religions and practices. One could also say that this is one of the underlying reasons as to why muslim countries cant advance.
The christmas card situation is not 'changing our ways to conform to any other religion'. It is this farce of political correctness which I abhore
I do agree with your paragraph regarding your mum etc to a certain extent. Indeed I do believe in integration but that doesnt mean that other races cant express their traditions or practices. For instance of course I would expect someone that enters this country on a permanent basis to learn english, basic english history etc but that doesnt mean in your instance that your mum cant wear traditional hungarian clothes.
True, alot of people do abuse the welfare system. So that means we should tar all benefit receivers with the same brush and withdraw the welfare system. I dont think so.
Indeed we should keep the coat of arms definitely.
The lovely quality of generalisation. Doesnt add strength to any debate.
Switchday, indeed I am the guy opposite you at beit, you are sharing arent you? I tried talking to 'you' but it was your roomate. I still havent seen you I dont think?
Regarding change, its simple, without change there is no progress. You name me one system be it political or whatever which hasnt changed, but has still progressed, and I will eat my words.
love2learn7, your gloating spree about your 7 A's wasnt needed, has changed my opinion of you a tad but Im sure you dont care about that.
a) the royal family generate far more income through tourism than they spend.
So that gives them the right to use tax money for their recreation etc. I agree with you but I am playing devils advocate. Workers in the tourism industry generate more money and add more value to the firms and economy than what they spend, does that entitle them to tax money?
b) the armed forces would not exist because they were formed by the royalty (navy especially)
so for that fact they should still exist, just incase they create another great organisation? Which organisations have the royal family created recently (ie in the last 20 years), and I mean organisations with the sucess of the army etc, not like the royal geographical society etc?
c) oxford, cambridge, imperial (created by queen victoria's husband so i was informed) would not exist, nor too would any of the institutions such as 'royal society'
d) the fact they are the royal stems from the fact that their ancestors put their lives on the line to lead people into battle- gaining the respect and becoming our country's leader!
And I suppose our mighty queen lizzie II has done all this in her tenure?
Racism- there are scientific facts about different 'types' of people but they are not allowed to be officially declared as it would induce racial hatred/riots.
I could state 'race X is clearly more intelligent than race Y due to the following data:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_an...ps_among_races)
Ok we shall use the IQ test as our barometer. We all should know that even if it is the best measure of intelligence, it is not perfect. Also you could quote that extract of data, but to not evaluate that data shows that you always look at something at face value. I think it will be pretty stupid to conclude from that data that Asians are naturally more intelligent than hispanics. Reason being that Asians could have been taught early in their life etc whereas Hispanics haven't. That gives rise to a lot of other arguments such as if intelligence is natural, but I tend to agree that it takes both nature and nurture to be intelligent, thus this early teaching could have a large affect on intelligence.
but people like you would class that as racist, i dont because its scientific.
lol @ scientific, so the group that carried out this test are perfect yes?
How is it racist to say that in this country we dont want lots of kosovans, serbs and albanian people clogging up our country. Its our bloody country, we pay for it and we should be entitled to state this! If thats racist then i stand by what i said. Britain is becoming a dump because labour is too sh@t scared to say 'no'.
That is being quite xenophobic. What do you mean clogging up our country. You say that as if they are adding no value to our country and economy? lol @ you thinking that Britain is becoming a dump because a certain statement you've said could be classed as racist when you think it isnt.
So that gives them the right to use tax money for their recreation etc. I agree with you but I am playing devils advocate. Workers in the tourism industry generate more money and add more value to the firms and economy than what they spend, does that entitle them to tax money?
b) the armed forces would not exist because they were formed by the royalty (navy especially)
so for that fact they should still exist, just incase they create another great organisation? Which organisations have the royal family created recently (ie in the last 20 years), and I mean organisations with the sucess of the army etc, not like the royal geographical society etc?
c) oxford, cambridge, imperial (created by queen victoria's husband so i was informed) would not exist, nor too would any of the institutions such as 'royal society'
d) the fact they are the royal stems from the fact that their ancestors put their lives on the line to lead people into battle- gaining the respect and becoming our country's leader!
And I suppose our mighty queen lizzie II has done all this in her tenure?
Racism- there are scientific facts about different 'types' of people but they are not allowed to be officially declared as it would induce racial hatred/riots.
I could state 'race X is clearly more intelligent than race Y due to the following data:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_an...ps_among_races)
Ok we shall use the IQ test as our barometer. We all should know that even if it is the best measure of intelligence, it is not perfect. Also you could quote that extract of data, but to not evaluate that data shows that you always look at something at face value. I think it will be pretty stupid to conclude from that data that Asians are naturally more intelligent than hispanics. Reason being that Asians could have been taught early in their life etc whereas Hispanics haven't. That gives rise to a lot of other arguments such as if intelligence is natural, but I tend to agree that it takes both nature and nurture to be intelligent, thus this early teaching could have a large affect on intelligence.
but people like you would class that as racist, i dont because its scientific.
lol @ scientific, so the group that carried out this test are perfect yes?
How is it racist to say that in this country we dont want lots of kosovans, serbs and albanian people clogging up our country. Its our bloody country, we pay for it and we should be entitled to state this! If thats racist then i stand by what i said. Britain is becoming a dump because labour is too sh@t scared to say 'no'.
That is being quite xenophobic. What do you mean clogging up our country. You say that as if they are adding no value to our country and economy? lol @ you thinking that Britain is becoming a dump because a certain statement you've said could be classed as racist when you think it isnt.
Nice post ashy although I disagree with a few things mentioned. Indeed a christian would probably have to adapt to respect the muslim religion. However one could argue that most if not all muslim countries are not as advanced as the christian (Western countries) and such countries have advanced to a stage where they can accommodate other religions and practices. One could also say that this is one of the underlying reasons as to why muslim countries cant advance.
England is a predominantly Christian country, and as such we are under no obligation to change our ways to conform to any other religion. ... Similarly, at Christmas, the majority of cards now say "Happy Holidays", rather than "Merry Christmas". I don't want to wish someone a happy holiday, I want to wish them a Merry Christmas.
The christmas card situation is not 'changing our ways to conform to any other religion'. It is this farce of political correctness which I abhore
I do agree with your paragraph regarding your mum etc to a certain extent. Indeed I do believe in integration but that doesnt mean that other races cant express their traditions or practices. For instance of course I would expect someone that enters this country on a permanent basis to learn english, basic english history etc but that doesnt mean in your instance that your mum cant wear traditional hungarian clothes.
True, alot of people do abuse the welfare system. So that means we should tar all benefit receivers with the same brush and withdraw the welfare system. I dont think so.
Indeed we should keep the coat of arms definitely.
if everything is so great why have we got youths walking the streets beating people up and videoing it? Why have we got 9yr olds causing damage to cars and nothing is done because they're under 10? Why have we got exmaination boards saying pupils dont use commans and still get A grades? Even tonnes of companies are complaining that teenagers dont even have the 3 R's! Do you call this progress switchday???? Wake up, get your head out of your arse (and national statistics) and look around! I dont need statistics to show labour are ruining our country! I live here and its getting beyong a joke.
The lovely quality of generalisation. Doesnt add strength to any debate.
love2learn7
btw private schools do not teach to pass exams! I would say the complete opposite!
Is that a freudian slip? I just like how the meaning was decided by context. Beautiful.
Tuppatopbrer, you say that not all Muslim countries are as "advanced" as the West. This may be true in some cases, but is it still an adequate excuse for that kind of behaviour? Why should the rules be so one sided? I'm also curious as to your definition of "advanced". Assumsing that some Muslim countries are less "advanced" then yes it makes sense that we should contribute part of our greater advancedness (for want of a better word) to them, but that doesn't mean that we should have to make such comprimises to our own way of life.
The Christmas card example was just that, an example of how things have changed to accommodate external influences.
It's actually my grandmother who integrated, my mum you'd never know is Hungarian, although I suppose it helps that Hungarians have the same colour skin as the English. And yes you're right that if she wanted to wear traditional Hungarian dress then she perhaps should be able to - clothes are clothes I suppose. However there are some rules in England that can be violated by religion. For example it is law to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike or bicycle, but you can be exempt from this if you wear a turban. Similarly weapons are not allowed on the streets or in public places (eg knives) but Sikh's are given permission to wear the Kirpan, which despite "religious sentiment", is still a deadly weapon. When I trained as a pool lifeguard I remember reading that Sikh's are even allowed to take the Kirpan into swimming pools with them! Is this fair and right?
And regarding the welfare system, I did not mean that they should all be tarred with the same brush, merely that I partly understand love2learn7's viewpoint.
(oh and wasn't part d of today's problem sheet a b*tch!
)
The Christmas card example was just that, an example of how things have changed to accommodate external influences.
It's actually my grandmother who integrated, my mum you'd never know is Hungarian, although I suppose it helps that Hungarians have the same colour skin as the English. And yes you're right that if she wanted to wear traditional Hungarian dress then she perhaps should be able to - clothes are clothes I suppose. However there are some rules in England that can be violated by religion. For example it is law to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike or bicycle, but you can be exempt from this if you wear a turban. Similarly weapons are not allowed on the streets or in public places (eg knives) but Sikh's are given permission to wear the Kirpan, which despite "religious sentiment", is still a deadly weapon. When I trained as a pool lifeguard I remember reading that Sikh's are even allowed to take the Kirpan into swimming pools with them! Is this fair and right?
And regarding the welfare system, I did not mean that they should all be tarred with the same brush, merely that I partly understand love2learn7's viewpoint.
(oh and wasn't part d of today's problem sheet a b*tch!
)love2learn7 is an ignorant ass. standard.
getting As at A-Level doesnt make you intelligent..it just makes you good at passing exams. how long before you understand the two aren't that closely related?
i cant be arsed to have an argument with someone who has the debating skills of a house plant.
tuppatopbrer - the guy with the afro..and the headphones?? i'm the guy always wearing a baseball cap...well mostly.
getting As at A-Level doesnt make you intelligent..it just makes you good at passing exams. how long before you understand the two aren't that closely related?
i cant be arsed to have an argument with someone who has the debating skills of a house plant.
tuppatopbrer - the guy with the afro..and the headphones?? i'm the guy always wearing a baseball cap...well mostly.
love2learn7
Labour could not even tell a committee hearing how many asylum seekers/immigrants were in this country! The stupid bloody idiots do nothing to improve our ways of life!
Switchday bitches on how exam passes are higher, job employment is higher bla bla bla- he loves going on national statistics and showing me all these lovely colourful graphs and stats throughout TSR.........
if everything is so great why have we got youths walking the streets beating people up and videoing it? Why have we got 9yr olds causing damage to cars and nothing is done because they're under 10? Why have we got exmaination boards saying pupils dont use commans and still get A grades? Even tonnes of companies are complaining that teenagers dont even have the 3 R's! Do you call this progress switchday???? Wake up, get your head out of your arse (and national statistics) and look around! I dont need statistics to show labour are ruining our country! I live here and its getting beyong a joke.
!
Labour could not even tell a committee hearing how many asylum seekers/immigrants were in this country! The stupid bloody idiots do nothing to improve our ways of life!
Switchday bitches on how exam passes are higher, job employment is higher bla bla bla- he loves going on national statistics and showing me all these lovely colourful graphs and stats throughout TSR.........
if everything is so great why have we got youths walking the streets beating people up and videoing it? Why have we got 9yr olds causing damage to cars and nothing is done because they're under 10? Why have we got exmaination boards saying pupils dont use commans and still get A grades? Even tonnes of companies are complaining that teenagers dont even have the 3 R's! Do you call this progress switchday???? Wake up, get your head out of your arse (and national statistics) and look around! I dont need statistics to show labour are ruining our country! I live here and its getting beyong a joke.
!
okay, i'm gonna break what i just said because i just couldnt help but reply to this.
you're basically saying..i dont care about facts..i dont care about reality..i only care about my bizzaro perceived reality
switchday loves throwing out stats because stats can prove something to be true and it can often show how the media mislead us into some bull****. if you went to one american and they mugged you, does that mean all americans are muggers? of course not. the only way we'd know the truth is by some sort of valid and reliable stat.
if you did a scientific experiment, would you just LOOK and see if you thought there was some change or would you conduct a statistical test to prove it? jesus christ, for someone at a science university, you dont know much about methodologies and what constitutes as valid and reliable proof.
****ing idiot. oince again, you prove you dont need to be intelligent to pass exams.
oh go and read the daily mail.
love2learn7
...why (as the pathetic person above has pointed out) do the Daily Mail make profits from selling stories?
They have good CDs and DVDs. Ironically one was Foreigner. I've found most people have noticed that it is fairly racist, but racists do exist, and they do have money. I assume they must buy it from time to time. Maybe it's used as toilet paper. The crazy frog seemed to sell well, I'm pretty sure that was evil or somethig. Celine Dion is still going. Maybe some things are inexplicable. I dunno.
Related discussions
- Cold mother
- Vet farm work experience
- What should I wear to theory test?
- Is this boy just flirting with me or does he like me
- Does Cambridge University accept resits?
- My Shoulder Hurts When I Laugh !
- MPhil in Basic and Translational Neuroscience at Uni of Cambridge
- Can someone give this Q5 a mark out of 40 please. .
- Is the UK prepared for WW3?
- year 13 feb mock
- UCAS amended decision
- Consultant sued NHS after being told to roll up sleeves like other doctors
- Anyone else feels uncomfortable in revealing clothes?
- Mphil Genomic medicine Cambridge 2024 interviews
- Ucl eee 2023
- Has anyone been involved in a level malpractice?
- Discontinued favourite foods or snacks.
- Am I still a virgin?
- Whats the most stupid rule your school has?
- The 'What Are You Wearing Today' Thread
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 9 minutes ago
University of Oxford 2025 Undergraduate Applicants Official ThreadLast reply 17 minutes ago
Based on 2023 GCSEs, will grade boundaries be higher or lower in 2024?GCSEs
13
Last reply 18 minutes ago
Apprenticeship needs a 4 in scienceLast reply 20 minutes ago
Should I accept my offer at LCF or wait another year and apply for CSM again?Last reply 22 minutes ago
GCSE geography case studies CIE -urgent help neededLast reply 24 minutes ago
Is it really such a bad thing to have an undefined relationshipLast reply 29 minutes ago
Best SEO Service Company In USALast reply 32 minutes ago
Worried about the acceptance of my A level Qualifications. Need an answerTrending
Last reply 1 day ago
Official Imperial College London Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 1 week ago
What are the chances I get the offer from Imperial for Computing?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Computer science application for Imperial College LondonLast reply 3 weeks ago
Official Imperial College 2024 Undergraduate Applicants ThreadTrending
Last reply 1 day ago
Official Imperial College London Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 1 week ago
What are the chances I get the offer from Imperial for Computing?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Computer science application for Imperial College LondonLast reply 3 weeks ago
Official Imperial College 2024 Undergraduate Applicants Thread
