I am looking forward to the BBC adaptation which we are recording. We went to the musical years ago - zzzzzzz. Tried the film when that came out - zzzzz, left halfway through. The music is dreadful, as I am sure everyone will agree.
Javid just needs to wait for some strong westerleys to build a swell in the channel big enough to make the passage suicidal then he can declare MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
Javid just needs to wait for some strong westerleys to build a swell in the channel big enough to make the passage suicidal then he can declare MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
Obligatory best Chrimbo movie watching completed...i.e. Die Hard, Die Hard 2, Home Alone....The question is do I inflict the disasters that are Die Hard 3+ and / or same with Home Alone on Chez Urquhart?
There's more snow in The Empire Strikes Back than in Die Hard, just saying.
I assume you were eating pizzas with pineapples on them whilst watching those films?
Just saying...
The neatest summary I can provide is to say that there are many Christmas elements in the movie. Although the studio did not intend it to be a Christmas movie, some of the film’s key creators did. Either way, it’s certainly fair to say that Die Hard is regarded as a Christmas movie in popular culture.
Like it or not, the association between Die Hard and Christmas is fast increasing and in years to come its Christmassyness will be beyon... believe it might have even been an 18 at time of release.
It was released in July 1988, definitely not a Christmas film.
Voted the Number 1 Christmas Movie by Empire Magazine readers. Described as unquestionably a Christmas Movie by Mark Kermode (with a long explanation about how it is set at Christmas, has a Christmas party as its main setting, includes a Christmas story of redemption and has the lead female character called Holly). Included as one of the great Christmas movies by the Sky Arts movie team.
Face it, as with your attitude to the French, denying Solo as great Star wars film and pineapple on pizza, this is just another example of how wrong you can be.
The Empire poll is a voodoo poll, the YouGov poll is a properly weighted poll.
Mark Kermode, we're in the age of sick and tired of experts.
I am looking forward to the BBC adaptation which we are recording. We went to the musical years ago - zzzzzzz. Tried the film when that came out - zzzzz, left halfway through. The music is dreadful, as I am sure everyone will agree.
At the end of the day, you clearly have a tin ear.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
My first wife insisted that I send my Dad home, who was staying with us for the weekend, when he tried that whataboutery argument on her.
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
My first wife insisted that I send my Dad home, who was staying with us for the weekend, when he tried that whataboutery argument on her.
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
Do you care to actually address the argument instead of a pointless anecdote of the personal intrigues and hatreds within your family?
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
The law does not provide for locking anyone up, even if they were illegally hunting foxes which in my very extensive first hand experience they simply aren't. Three cheers for ill informed chippiness.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
Yes. Sick feckers as well.
Fair enough. I don't fully agree, but at least you're consistent.
(As an aside, I've very rarely met any female anglers whilst out and about. On a recent walk I came across two separate women who were fishing on the Grand Union Canal.)
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
My first wife insisted that I send my Dad home, who was staying with us for the weekend, when he tried that whataboutery argument on her.
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
Do you care to actually address the argument instead of a pointless anecdote of the personal intrigues and hatreds within your family?
The point of the anecdote was that the argument is pointlessly divisive and tends to be used by people - like my Dad - more interested in winning an argument than having an interesting debate that might lead them to change their mind. Such people are more interested in talking than listening. (As indeed am I on occasion).
A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Sometimes JosiasJessop you have something to say that it's worth listening to. That argument is not a promising starting point.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
The law does not provide for locking anyone up, even if they were illegally hunting foxes which in my very extensive first hand experience they simply aren't. Three cheers for ill informed chippiness.
I doubt the pack that romped through our village were officially hunting a fox. I suspect, as it was Christmas Eve and I only saw a few horses, they were exercising the hounds in prep for their traditional Boxing Day hunt. But why bring them through the village and various private gardens?
Hasn't everybody? I feel sorry for the staff at the Boundary Commission. Some connection between effort and outcome is useful in feeling satisfaction in a job, and their time seems to be a total waste.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
The law does not provide for locking anyone up, even if they were illegally hunting foxes which in my very extensive first hand experience they simply aren't. Three cheers for ill informed chippiness.
I doubt the pack that romped through our village were officially hunting a fox. I suspect, as it was Christmas Eve and I only saw a few horses, they were exercising the hounds in prep for their traditional Boxing Day hunt. But why bring them through the village and various private gardens?
Good question, and they should bee better controlled then that.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
The law does not provide for locking anyone up, even if they were illegally hunting foxes which in my very extensive first hand experience they simply aren't. Three cheers for ill informed chippiness.
I doubt the pack that romped through our village were officially hunting a fox. I suspect, as it was Christmas Eve and I only saw a few horses, they were exercising the hounds in prep for their traditional Boxing Day hunt. But why bring them through the village and various private gardens?
Because they are a bunch of arrogant twats who think they can do as they please.
I thought private schools have done iGCSE for years, initially because they were thought of as harder than GCSEs & recognized worldwide.
If I remember the issue is now they still have some coursework element, therefore it has been concluded by the guardian columnists that they must be easier.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
The law does not provide for locking anyone up, even if they were illegally hunting foxes which in my very extensive first hand experience they simply aren't. Three cheers for ill informed chippiness.
I doubt the pack that romped through our village were officially hunting a fox. I suspect, as it was Christmas Eve and I only saw a few horses, they were exercising the hounds in prep for their traditional Boxing Day hunt. But why bring them through the village and various private gardens?
Because they are a bunch of arrogant twats who think they can do as they please.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
My first wife insisted that I send my Dad home, who was staying with us for the weekend, when he tried that whataboutery argument on her.
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
Do you care to actually address the argument instead of a pointless anecdote of the personal intrigues and hatreds within your family?
The point of the anecdote was that the argument is pointlessly divisive and tends to be used by people - like my Dad - more interested in winning an argument than having an interesting debate that might lead them to change their mind. Such people are more interested in talking than listening. (As indeed am I on occasion).
A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Sometimes JosiasJessop you have something to say that it's worth listening to. That argument is not a promising starting point.
Good night.
I disagree. I said it half-jokingly, but that argument can lead in several interesting directions: *) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree? *) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals? *) Do animals even have rights? *) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter? *) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers) etc,etc.
That argument is a useful shorthand for many of the above, and can serve as a good introduction. At the least the response to it shows people who have f'all idea about the topic.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Normally I can contain my emotions, it isn't an issue in the posh seats.
Last season, I was in the posh seats for the Champions League QF second leg at the Etihad, City scored their second goal to make the tie 3-2 and I let out a very loud 'Oh ferfuxsake' fortunately it coincided with the Ref ruling out the goal for offside, so I got away with it.
What this story says to me, and I'm very much a non-expert, is how messy all of this has become - and I was in the year of changeover between O-levels and GCSE's.
Or perhaps it's always been messy, and I'm just unfamiliar with the current system ...
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Normally I can contain my emotions, it isn't an issue in the posh seats.
Last season, I was in the posh seats for the Champions League QF second leg at the Etihad, City scored their second goal to make the tie 3-2 and I let out a very loud 'Oh ferfuxsake' fortunately it coincided with the Ref ruling out the goal for offside, so I got away with it.
Given the capacity of the "Emptyhad" and that it's never sold out I can imagine there'll be a fair few Liverpool fans in City's seats on Thursday.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Normally I can contain my emotions, it isn't an issue in the posh seats.
Last season, I was in the posh seats for the Champions League QF second leg at the Etihad, City scored their second goal to make the tie 3-2 and I let out a very loud 'Oh ferfuxsake' fortunately it coincided with the Ref ruling out the goal for offside, so I got away with it.
Given the capacity of the "Emptyhad" and that it's never sold out I can imagine there'll be a fair few Liverpool fans in City's seats on Thursday.
City still are selling seats for the match.
If this match was at Anfield it would have sold out weeks ago.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did theienforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
My first wife insisted that I send my Dad home, who was staying with us for the weekend, when he tried that whataboutery argument on her.
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
Do you care to actually address the argument instead of a pointless anecdote of the personal intrigues and hatreds within your family?
The point of the anecdote w Good night.
I disagree. I said it half-jokingly, but that argument can lead in several interesting directions: *) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree? *) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals? *) Do animals even have rights? *) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter? *) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers) etc,etc.
That argument is a useful shorthand for many of the above, and can serve as a good introduction. At the least the response to it shows people who have f'all idea about the topic.
Some brief responses:
1. I don't know, but painless abuse and killing is still abuse and killing. 2. The rights of individual humans are no more important than those of other animals. 3. Yes. Extend Rawls' 'veil of ignorance' so you don't know what species you belong to and it makes sense to agree. I would also extend rights to the inanimate, such as mountains, rivers, and asteroids. 4. Sticking one to the twats who hunt is a secondary benefit. The primary purpose is animal protection. 5. If humans put a load of prey in one place then they shouldn't be surprised if predators take advantage. By all means take means to protect the farm animals by building fences, etc., but do not attack the predators.
I'm sure that NickPalmer could give very interesting answers to your questions.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
What this story says to me, and I'm very much a non-expert, is how messy all of this has become - and I was in the year of changeover between O-levels and GCSE's.
Or perhaps it's always been messy, and I'm just unfamiliar with the current system ...
Of course in the O level days there were CSEs, which my wife (now BA, MA) endured having just missed out on her 11-plus.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Normally I can contain my emotions, it isn't an issue in the posh seats.
Last season, I was in the posh seats for the Champions League QF second leg at the Etihad, City scored their second goal to make the tie 3-2 and I let out a very loud 'Oh ferfuxsake' fortunately it coincided with the Ref ruling out the goal for offside, so I got away with it.
Given the capacity of the "Emptyhad" and that it's never sold out I can imagine there'll be a fair few Liverpool fans in City's seats on Thursday.
City still are selling seats for the match.
If this match was at Anfield it would have sold out weeks ago.
I have actually seen the Etihad in person - from the comfort of the train coming in to Piccadilly station - but also from the Metrolink tram near Etihad Campus station
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
I feel for you. But however expensive your bling, it’s football.
Firstly there appears to be a lot of pontificating on the consequences of a no deal Brexit from people who don't seem overly well-informed one way or the other. I'm amazed how many claim it will be just fine/total disaster (delete as appropriate) without appearing to need any expert knowledge.
Secondly what is the pb view on hunting - specifically of foxes? Part of my social media feed seems to think civil war is about to break out in the countryside. Maybe that just says something about my friends!
Hunting - lock the feckers up, evil cnuts.
About time the police did their job and enforced the law.
I look forward to you saying the same about people who fish ...
Oddly what would be killing fox hunting if people still did it, which they don't, is not the law but large scale commercial pheasant shooting which entails the genuine extermination of the entire fox population by gamekeepers with rifles and night sights, in support of a sport which positively aspires to kill 100s of proposed breed animals per day where hunting was always satisfied with just a couple.
So the rifle is mightier than the hound? I always thought the utilitarian argument for fox hunting was that it was more efficient?
I disagree. I said it half-jokingly, but that argument can lead in several interesting directions: *) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree? *) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals? *) Do animals even have rights? *) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter? *) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers) etc,etc.
That argument is a useful shorthand for many of the above, and can serve as a good introduction. At the least the response to it shows people who have f'all idea about the topic.
Some brief responses:
1. I don't know, but painless abuse and killing is still abuse and killing. 2. The rights of individual humans are no more important than those of other animals. 3. Yes. Extend Rawls' 'veil of ignorance' so you don't know what species you belong to and it makes sense to agree. I would also extend rights to the inanimate, such as mountains, rivers, and asteroids. 4. Sticking one to the twats who hunt is a secondary benefit. The primary purpose is animal protection. 5. If humans put a load of prey in one place then they shouldn't be surprised if predators take advantage. By all means take means to protect the farm animals by building fences, etc., but do not attack the predators.
I'm sure that NickPalmer could give very interesting answers to your questions.
Thanks, that's interesting - although as you might guess, I personally disagree with much of it. For one thing, I'd put one person's life above that of any number of animals. In other words, if I had to kill five cute bunnies to save my son, I would do so. Or even to save the life of someone I dislike. I put people above animals - and yes, I'm aware there's deep issues with doing that.
Then there are other issues: Mrs J hates causing animals pain, but feels no problem in my killing ants on the odd occasion they find their way into the kitchen (although we always try to stop them from getting in again). And many people have no problem killing rats, but love cats and dogs. I do detect a certain fondness for higher-order animals over the lower-order ones in many people.
And as well as inanimate objects, you get bacteria and viruses: and our bodies routinely kill millions of them a day.
As you might expect, I disagree about asteroids. And that's timely, as a probe will be flying past Ultima Thule in a day or so,
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It is, sort of, in Glasgow. Partick Thistle fans are popularly portrayed as craft beer drinking, Camus reading hipsters, existentially inured to sporting failure.
So it seems that the government has entered into a ferry contract with a company that doesn't have any ferries.
I don't see how anything could possibly go wrong.
Well we had a new train timetable with no trains or drivers recently so nothing is surprising these days.
This ferry company with no ferries won a tender for 14 million quid with nobody else invited to participate. The company appears, weirldy, to be owned by the Tory party's largest donor.
Surely that must be a mistake? The government wouldn't be so thick as to indulge in corruption that massive and that obvious, would it?
Even Theresa May isn't that thick.
Apparently we can't find money to house veterans with PTSD but we can can find £14 million to give to Seaborne Freight who have no ships, no trading history and no reputation beyond being owned by a huge Tory donor.
Lest we forget the Star Wars saga started because of a trade dispute.
Which could be a metaphor for Brexit.
I thought it was about not being part of a United States of Europe myself. Thought most Remainers, though, were, wrongly, of the opinion Brexit was about immigration.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
Presumably to prosecute the manufacturers for ripping you off?
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
Not as bad as when you spend a decent chunk of change of some expensive plonk for Christmas, have some friends around on Boxing Day and one prefers the £6 sugary fizz from Tescos and another sticks lemonade in it.
Should be made to watch Hans Solo movie on loop for the rest of the year for that.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It is, sort of, in Glasgow. Partick Thistle fans are popularly portrayed as craft beer drinking, Camus reading hipsters, existentially inured to sporting failure.
When I lived in Glasgow, all the Old Firm fans were a bit sniffy about St Mirren.
Lest we forget the Star Wars saga started because of a trade dispute.
Which could be a metaphor for Brexit.
I thought it was about not being part of a United States of Europe myself. Thought most Remainers, though, were, wrongly, of the opinion Brexit was about immigration.
My favourite bit of Brexit has been watching leavers trying to convince us that their racism is part of some grander plan unknowable to us because they're operating on a more rarefied philosophical plane.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
Presumably to prosecute the manufacturers for ripping you off?
Hopefully that price means those who made them were well paid and not basically slave children at least.
Lest we forget the Star Wars saga started because of a trade dispute.
Which could be a metaphor for Brexit.
I thought it was about not being part of a United States of Europe myself. Thought most Remainers, though, were, wrongly, of the opinion Brexit was about immigration.
My favourite bit of Brexit has been watching leavers trying to convince us that their racism is part of some grander plan unknowable to us because they're operating on a more rarefied philosophical plane.
That’s because you believe in fairy tales - and obviously subscribe to race based immigration apartheid
Lest we forget the Star Wars saga started because of a trade dispute.
Which could be a metaphor for Brexit.
I thought it was about not being part of a United States of Europe myself. Thought most Remainers, though, were, wrongly, of the opinion Brexit was about immigration.
My favourite bit of Brexit has been watching leavers trying to convince us that their racism is part of some grander plan unknowable to us because they're operating on a more rarefied philosophical plane.
That’s because you believe in fairy tales.
I believe I can fly. I believe I can touch the sky.
I disagree. I said it half-jokingly, but that argument can lead in several interesting directions: *) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree? *) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals? *) Do animals even have rights? *) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter? *) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers)
I'm not keen to dive into a long debate on this well-worn topic, but in case you do want serious replies:
Fish: almost certainly feel pain and frustration. See an in-depth analysis here: https://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/fish/ Broadly speaking, fish farming is often nasty, whereas wild-caught fish presumably live normal lives until caught (though their death is often particularly nasty - asphixiation etc.). An individual fish caught by an angler, immediately killed and then eaten is very different from a migratory fish trapped in a crowded marine cage for life.
Rights of individuals (presumably you mean individual people) vs animals: obviously a matter of opinion. Broadly speaking, I'd say that the more the sentience and the more extreme the difference in pleasure/pain, the easier to answer. I'm relaxed about killing a mosquito in Africa as I doubt if it will feel pain and it might do me serious harm. I wouldn't do bear-baiting even if I enjoyed it because the pleasure it would give me is minor compared to the suffering for the bear.
The hunting ban was IMO primarily motivated by concern for the animals, and I was in the "core group" that got it through. I come from a hunting family - my father tried it and gave it up as too cruel; my uncle hunted for many years, conceded it was a bit cruel but said it was so glorious that it was worth it. The ban affected the mostly working-class sport of coursing equally - in fact rather more effectively. I do think we spent too much time on that topic compared with all the other animal issues, but the Tory/Lords filibuster was frankly difficult to accept.
My personal view is that the priority is not to cause disproportionate suffering, and usually there are more and less nasty ways (e.g. good fencing) to protect one species from another.
If an animal has a good life and a swift, humane death then I personally think that's not a bad deal - it's about what I want for myself. But I wouldn't cause any suffering at all for the sake of having fun, and the killer fact for me on fox-hunting was that it's so ineffective as a means of control (by far the most foxes die from other causes), and it's clearly mostly about having a colourful, exciting time. There are other ways of doing that, no?
Lest we forget the Star Wars saga started because of a trade dispute.
Which could be a metaphor for Brexit.
I thought it was about not being part of a United States of Europe myself. Thought most Remainers, though, were, wrongly, of the opinion Brexit was about immigration.
My favourite bit of Brexit has been watching leavers trying to convince us that their racism is part of some grander plan unknowable to us because they're operating on a more rarefied philosophical plane.
That’s because you believe in fairy tales.
I believe I can fly. I believe I can touch the sky.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It really is, when I spend £700 on a pair of trainers and there's some chav boasting he's picked up the same trainers (but fake) for £90 in Rusholme I'm tempted to called in the Rozzers.
Presumably to prosecute the manufacturers for ripping you off?
Hopefully that price means those who made them were well paid and not basically slave children at least.
It will make an appearance in a future PB thread header, fuckwangled has replaced schadenfreude as my favourite word in the English language.
Cheered me up a bit... Was expecting more than 5 though.
We were conserving energy for Thursday.
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
With the plebs, i presume you will be showing in dettol afterwards!
Have a booked a delousing for straight after the match.
How are you going to pass as a City fan? First goal (or chance even) at either end will give you away.
Surely TSE will be spotted well before then...unless he is going to dig out the old tracksuit, shoulder man bag and fake burberry cap.
It is fake Gucci and Louis Vuitton these days in Manchester.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
The idea that snobbery is possible in the context of football is amusing.
It is, sort of, in Glasgow. Partick Thistle fans are popularly portrayed as craft beer drinking, Camus reading hipsters, existentially inured to sporting failure.
Sounds as though they are not really interested in football, so I guess it’s possible. (And I’m pretty sure the goalkeeping thing was just an ironic pose for Camus, too...)
We live in Brexit Britain, truth left a long time ago. All that matters is which Tory can hate immigrants the loudest.
No yet we don’t and Remainers seem to be doing their best to give a two fingered salute to 52% of the electorate.
Supporters of a Labour Party wracked by misogyny and antisemitism, particularly if they are Remainers and also believe in race based immigration apartheid, are giving a whole new definition to hate based politics.
I disagree. I said it half-jokingly, but that argument can lead in several interesting directions: *) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree? *) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals? *) Do animals even have rights? *) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter? *) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers)
I'm not keen to dive into a long debate on this well-worn topic, but in case you do want serious replies:
Fish: almost certainly feel pain and frustration. See an in-depth analysis here: https://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/fish/ Broadly speaking, fish farming is often nasty, whereas wild-caught fish presumably live normal lives until caught (though their death is often particularly nasty - asphixiation etc.). An individual fish caught by an angler, immediately killed and then eaten is very different from a migratory fish trapped in a crowded marine cage for life.
Rights of individuals (presumably you mean individual people) vs animals: obviously a matter of opinion. Broadly speaking, I'd say that the more the sentience and the more extreme the difference in pleasure/pain, the easier to answer. I'm relaxed about killing a mosquito in Africa as I doubt if it will feel pain and it might do me serious harm. I wouldn't do bear-baiting even if I enjoyed it because the pleasure it would give me is minor compared to the suffering for the bear.
The hunting ban was IMO primarily motivated by concern for the animals, and I was in the "core group" that got it through. I come from a hunting family - my father tried it and gave it up as too cruel; my uncle hunted for many years, conceded it was a bit cruel but said it was so glorious that it was worth it. The ban affected the mostly working-class sport of coursing equally - in fact rather more effectively. I do think we spent too much time on that topic compared with all the other animal issues, but the Tory/Lords filibuster was frankly difficult to accept.
My personal view is that the priority is not to cause disproportionate suffering, and usually there are more and less nasty ways (e.g. good fencing) to protect one species from another.
If an animal has a good life and a swift, humane death then I personally think that's not a bad deal - it's about what I want for myself. But I wouldn't cause any suffering at all for the sake of having fun, and the killer fact for me on fox-hunting was that it's so ineffective as a means of control (by far the most foxes die from other causes), and it's clearly mostly about having a colourful, exciting time. There are other ways of doing that, no?
I'm not keen to dive into a long debate on this well-worn topic, but in case you do want serious replies:
Fish: almost certainly feel pain and frustration. See an in-depth analysis here: https://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/fish/ Broadly speaking, fish farming is often nasty, whereas wild-caught fish presumably live normal lives until caught (though their death is often particularly nasty - asphixiation etc.). An individual fish caught by an angler, immediately killed and then eaten is very different from a migratory fish trapped in a crowded marine cage for life.
Rights of individuals (presumably you mean individual people) vs animals: obviously a matter of opinion. Broadly speaking, I'd say that the more the sentience and the more extreme the difference in pleasure/pain, the easier to answer. I'm relaxed about killing a mosquito in Africa as I doubt if it will feel pain and it might do me serious harm. I wouldn't do bear-baiting even if I enjoyed it because the pleasure it would give me is minor compared to the suffering for the bear.
The hunting ban was IMO primarily motivated by concern for the animals, and I was in the "core group" that got it through. I come from a hunting family - my father tried it and gave it up as too cruel; my uncle hunted for many years, conceded it was a bit cruel but said it was so glorious that it was worth it. The ban affected the mostly working-class sport of coursing equally - in fact rather more effectively. I do think we spent too much time on that topic compared with all the other animal issues, but the Tory/Lords filibuster was frankly difficult to accept.
My personal view is that the priority is not to cause disproportionate suffering, and usually there are more and less nasty ways (e.g. good fencing) to protect one species from another.
If an animal has a good life and a swift, humane death then I personally think that's not a bad deal - it's about what I want for myself. But I wouldn't cause any suffering at all for the sake of having fun, and the killer fact for me on fox-hunting was that it's so ineffective as a means of control (by far the most foxes die from other causes), and it's clearly mostly about having a colourful, exciting time. There are other ways of doing that, no?
Thanks for your reply. I can't respond fully at the moment (been up since 4, and need to go to bed), but I did want serious replies, particularly as IANAE on these issues, although have looked into them. Agree about the 'disproportionate suffering' bit.
The government wanted more control over the school exams and in January 2015 Nick Gibb, the schools minister, announced that iGCSEs would not be recognised by OFQUAL. Subsequently they have also not been included in the official school league tables.
As has been already noted, iGCSEs were designed to be more like the old O levels, which the international English speaking schools preferred.
As the GCSEs became easier, and the gap up to A levels bigger, the private schools adopted them mainly so that their pupils were better prepared for A levels.
I am not aware of any proper comparison between GCSEs and iGCSEs as to which are actual easier.
Indeed, as they are no longer regulated by OFQUAL there may be differences between the exam boards. But, unlike state schools, the main focus for private schools will be to teach their students towards A levels and good universities. As such iGCSEs are only a stepping stone, not an end in itself. Thus there little motive to drive down standards (unlike the historic GCSEs).
No yet we don’t and Remainers seem to be doing their best to give a two fingered salute to 52% of the electorate.
I voted to leave, so I'm not really a remainer.
But leavers have shown themselves to be, by and large, racist imbeciles to a man. So, yeah, happy to give you the finger. Y'all can swivel on it too, if you want.
Comments
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1079492447011512321
I am looking forward to the BBC adaptation which we are recording. We went to the musical years ago - zzzzzzz. Tried the film when that came out - zzzzz, left halfway through. The music is dreadful, as I am sure everyone will agree.
And after all he went through, I think he’s earned the right to make the declaration. Are you some kind of Euro-terrorist sympathiser ... ?
While we're at it: bucks fizz! Wtf is that about?
Take two perfectly acceptable drinks, mix them together to make... imitation Tango. Yuurch!
Even after I divorced he still does not trust me to stay the night again.
"NOW I HAVE A MACHINE GUN: HO HO HO!"
Christmas movie
Wish me luck, I've got tickets and I have to pretend to be a Citeh supporter for the evening.
Worst of all I'm in the cheap seats.
Is why I'm not expecting to win the title.
City win on Thursday and our lead is down to four points and City win the title.
Now had he claimed it a Christmas movie, I might just have been persuaded.
I don't see how anything could possibly go wrong.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1079448599229067264
(As an aside, I've very rarely met any female anglers whilst out and about. On a recent walk I came across two separate women who were fishing on the Grand Union Canal.)
A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Sometimes JosiasJessop you have something to say that it's worth listening to. That argument is not a promising starting point.
Good night.
If I remember the issue is now they still have some coursework element, therefore it has been concluded by the guardian columnists that they must be easier.
[last lines]
John McClane: Merry Christmas, Argyle.
Argyle: Merry Christmas.
Richard Thornburg: [to the camera] Did ya get that?
Argyle: [Argyle shuts the limo door] If this is their idea of Christmas, I *gotta* be here for New Year's.
I know, a typo in my typo joke. Who'd a thunked it eh?
*) Do fish feel pain? If so, to what degree?
*) How more important are the rights of individuals over those of animals?
*) Do animals even have rights?
*) How much is the hunting ban a political ban against people others do not like? And if so, does it matter?
*) How much should protecting one species (e.g. sheep, grouse, cattle) impinge on other species (foxes, birds of prey, badgers)
etc,etc.
That argument is a useful shorthand for many of the above, and can serve as a good introduction. At the least the response to it shows people who have f'all idea about the topic.
... the weather outside is frightful,
But the fire is so delightful,
And since we've no place to go,
Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhLyJDKOpBg
Last season, I was in the posh seats for the Champions League QF second leg at the Etihad, City scored their second goal to make the tie 3-2 and I let out a very loud 'Oh ferfuxsake' fortunately it coincided with the Ref ruling out the goal for offside, so I got away with it.
Which is galling when I have the genuine stuff.
If only PB had someone who decided to quit than move to the EU due to the relocation of lots of banking / financial services jobs.
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1079501749570940933
Or perhaps it's always been messy, and I'm just unfamiliar with the current system ...
[Argyle turns on the radio in the limousine and Run DMC's "Christmas in Hollis" is playing]
Argyle: Hey, that'll work.
John McClane: Don't you got any Christmas music?
Argyle: This *is* Christmas music!
If this match was at Anfield it would have sold out weeks ago.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-ticket-woe-ahead-15611414
1. I don't know, but painless abuse and killing is still abuse and killing.
2. The rights of individual humans are no more important than those of other animals.
3. Yes. Extend Rawls' 'veil of ignorance' so you don't know what species you belong to and it makes sense to agree. I would also extend rights to the inanimate, such as mountains, rivers, and asteroids.
4. Sticking one to the twats who hunt is a secondary benefit. The primary purpose is animal protection.
5. If humans put a load of prey in one place then they shouldn't be surprised if predators take advantage. By all means take means to protect the farm animals by building fences, etc., but do not attack the predators.
I'm sure that NickPalmer could give very interesting answers to your questions.
Not to worry the financial services isn't the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh.
The Brexiteers are going to cause as much economic ruin as Corbyn.
But however expensive your bling, it’s football.
1. I don't know, but painless abuse and killing is still abuse and killing.
2. The rights of individual humans are no more important than those of other animals.
3. Yes. Extend Rawls' 'veil of ignorance' so you don't know what species you belong to and it makes sense to agree. I would also extend rights to the inanimate, such as mountains, rivers, and asteroids.
4. Sticking one to the twats who hunt is a secondary benefit. The primary purpose is animal protection.
5. If humans put a load of prey in one place then they shouldn't be surprised if predators take advantage. By all means take means to protect the farm animals by building fences, etc., but do not attack the predators.
I'm sure that NickPalmer could give very interesting answers to your questions.
Thanks, that's interesting - although as you might guess, I personally disagree with much of it. For one thing, I'd put one person's life above that of any number of animals. In other words, if I had to kill five cute bunnies to save my son, I would do so. Or even to save the life of someone I dislike. I put people above animals - and yes, I'm aware there's deep issues with doing that.
Then there are other issues: Mrs J hates causing animals pain, but feels no problem in my killing ants on the odd occasion they find their way into the kitchen (although we always try to stop them from getting in again). And many people have no problem killing rats, but love cats and dogs. I do detect a certain fondness for higher-order animals over the lower-order ones in many people.
And as well as inanimate objects, you get bacteria and viruses: and our bodies routinely kill millions of them a day.
As you might expect, I disagree about asteroids. And that's timely, as a probe will be flying past Ultima Thule in a day or so,
Again, thanks for your response.
Surely that must be a mistake? The government wouldn't be so thick as to indulge in corruption that massive and that obvious, would it?
Even Theresa May isn't that thick.
Apparently we can't find money to house veterans with PTSD but we can can find £14 million to give to Seaborne Freight who have no ships, no trading history and no reputation beyond being owned by a huge Tory donor.
Should be made to watch Hans Solo movie on loop for the rest of the year for that.
They're showing The Farce Awakens on ITV* right now!
(* well Channel 33, ITV+1)
Trendy Gucci trainers, the height of fashion in the North of England.
Fish: almost certainly feel pain and frustration. See an in-depth analysis here:
https://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/fish/ Broadly speaking, fish farming is often nasty, whereas wild-caught fish presumably live normal lives until caught (though their death is often particularly nasty - asphixiation etc.). An individual fish caught by an angler, immediately killed and then eaten is very different from a migratory fish trapped in a crowded marine cage for life.
Rights of individuals (presumably you mean individual people) vs animals: obviously a matter of opinion. Broadly speaking, I'd say that the more the sentience and the more extreme the difference in pleasure/pain, the easier to answer. I'm relaxed about killing a mosquito in Africa as I doubt if it will feel pain and it might do me serious harm. I wouldn't do bear-baiting even if I enjoyed it because the pleasure it would give me is minor compared to the suffering for the bear.
The hunting ban was IMO primarily motivated by concern for the animals, and I was in the "core group" that got it through. I come from a hunting family - my father tried it and gave it up as too cruel; my uncle hunted for many years, conceded it was a bit cruel but said it was so glorious that it was worth it. The ban affected the mostly working-class sport of coursing equally - in fact rather more effectively. I do think we spent too much time on that topic compared with all the other animal issues, but the Tory/Lords filibuster was frankly difficult to accept.
My personal view is that the priority is not to cause disproportionate suffering, and usually there are more and less nasty ways (e.g. good fencing) to protect one species from another.
If an animal has a good life and a swift, humane death then I personally think that's not a bad deal - it's about what I want for myself. But I wouldn't cause any suffering at all for the sake of having fun, and the killer fact for me on fox-hunting was that it's so ineffective as a means of control (by far the most foxes die from other causes), and it's clearly mostly about having a colourful, exciting time. There are other ways of doing that, no?
(And I’m pretty sure the goalkeeping thing was just an ironic pose for Camus, too...)
Supporters of a Labour Party wracked by misogyny and antisemitism, particularly if they are Remainers and also believe in race based immigration apartheid, are giving a whole new definition to hate based politics.
As has been already noted, iGCSEs were designed to be more like the old O levels, which the international English speaking schools preferred.
As the GCSEs became easier, and the gap up to A levels bigger, the private schools adopted them mainly so that their pupils were better prepared for A levels.
I am not aware of any proper comparison between GCSEs and iGCSEs as to which are actual easier.
Indeed, as they are no longer regulated by OFQUAL there may be differences between the exam boards. But, unlike state schools, the main focus for private schools will be to teach their students towards A levels and good universities. As such iGCSEs are only a stepping stone, not an end in itself. Thus there little motive to drive down standards (unlike the historic GCSEs).
But leavers have shown themselves to be, by and large, racist imbeciles to a man. So, yeah, happy to give you the finger. Y'all can swivel on it too, if you want.