Gambino like a call girl, FUCK YOU PAY ME - Brand new whip for these niggas CALL IT slavery.

We fought and "won" a war for the "rebels" in Libya so a nutcase sharia law spouting loony could take control. Great job to all involved and a special thanks to Obama! Where would we be without you!?

D Bunker simply ‘knows’ that evolution took place. This level of certainty can only come from his atheist faith, as he has not (a) investigated the scientific evidence for and against Darwinism/evolution himself (b) observed a debate between experts on Darwinism/evolution such as was initiated a few years ago over AGW, in which Channel 4 made ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’ and the BBC replied with their views in ‘Climate Wars’. But of course we all know that all further documentaries critical of AGW were blocked from the TV media, with the BBC shouting and screaming and giving maximum publicity to those who complained to Ofcom about GGWS. So the debate was successfully terminated and the Climate Change Act was passed that will cost us £400 billion (over a period, by the government’s own figures).

A similar wall of protection that currently exists for the AGW beliefs in the TV media also exists for the Darwinism/evolution beliefs, although the latter wall has never been breached, unlike the breach of the AGW wall by Channel 4, once and once only.

I do not see how an open-minded person can conclude that a theory such as AGW or Darwinism must be a ‘fact’ without having gone through either (a) or (b) above. But I suppose we all think differently and some are content to form an opinion after hearing one side only without experiencing any feeling of unease.

On your other point, yes, I am agnostic and I have already ranked the alternatives to Darwinism in terms of credibility in a list going from least plausible to most plausible, in my opinion. Yet you still ask me “at least give me your preference” so you can ‘debunk’ it. Okay, one that I ‘like’ is John Wheeler's explanation of the meaning of the universe. More to do with a 'mathematical' reason for designing us than from ‘love’. I am not expert enough to fully evaluate it, but I take you up on your offer to ‘debunk’ it.

It is not necessary to refer to alternative explanations in order to evaluate Darwinism from a scientific point of view. It should stand or fail on its own merits. It makes predictions. Let these be tested, as in (b) above. This is how proper science works, and this is the only way to make true progress in science. Blocking scrutiny of a theory is a violation of the principles of science, and only serves to hinder progress in science. Progress in science has always been kept back by closed minds that do not tolerate scientific scrutiny of favoured theories.

as Private Eye turn 50, and after last week's Frost/Nixon Night on BBC Two, consider that the satire boomers of the early 1960s were so anti-Establishment that they were able to establish themselves in the West End and on the BBC while still in their early twenties, and in some cases while still at university. Look at them now, and do not marvel that they have somehow sold out. They never bought in. Rather, they were born into.

As for Private Eye, I cannot argue against that . Its obvious to any with political nous .Even Hislop is now the BBC cuddley uncle Ian now. Also very similar Is the socialist workers party, trying to con the youth of today they too are radical .with there ready made placards for all occasions.
A state owned nationalised bunch of losers protesting at the drop of a hat. Didn't see them protesting the release of Magrahi. As it was all part of a carve up that the Diplomatic service of this country has as an art form. Mind you with Libya going down the tubes .I bet he wished he'd stayed in that Scottish Guest House, Three squares and the best medical hogwash money could bribe.

The ECJ said in a statement: "A system of licences for the broadcasting of football matches which grants broadcasters territorial exclusivity on a member state basis and which prohibits television viewers from watching the broadcasts with a decoder card in other member states is contrary to EU law."

So I'm thinking...
Then how is it also legal for the BBC to charge people for watching the BBC via a TV Poll Tax?...
More to the point how is it LEGAL (using EU diktat) for the BBC to force people to pay them for merely OWNING a TV even if you DON'T WATCH THE BBC.

Um, the Truth seems to be the protestors belong to the Ivy League upper income non-productive elite that has been the source of Leftist twaddle in this country since the sixties if not before. Foxnews' condemnation barely balances the love from the rest of the networks. As a columnist on Foxnews.com admits they have a few good points, but for the most part it's the usual anti-capitalist twaddle.