Bazdavies79

Funny that, I personally think immigration has been one of the most hotly debated issues of the last 10 years. If fact, I think too much time and energy has been spent on the subject when there are much more pressing issues.

Lib Dems, not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but over the last decade have been by far the most competent and morally sound of the 3 main parties. They've consistently put forward policies founded on good moral values, which is why probably why they'd never win an election.

Can't choose between them. Both started off awesome and became overblown behemoths. Early Zep 1969-1970 with their heavy the psychedelic blues sound, Jimmy's painted telecaster and his hippy velvet pants were just superb. They looked good and sounded better IMO than their more famous 70's era with the flairs and big stadium shows. Zep The Who were great in their early days too, with their classic early British RnB sound and their mod clothing. But like Zeppelin went downhill as the music became too fat and self indulgent. Who I find it impossible to choose which I prefer? :|

I used to think of myself as a sports fan, until I realised I actually find every sport intensely boring to watch, apart from football. I can manage rugby, motor racing and snooker or even a little bit of athletics if I've got nowt to do, but I don't want any more boring sports on TV thank you! I'll just stick to football I love it.

Nice guy's come last. I'm happy being a Villain.

Yeti John Hassall's (former Libertine) stuff sounds pretty good.

For aircraft enthusiasts, how low can you go.... 2 3 4

I was very positive but life is making me more cynical as I get older. However when I am positive my luck seems to go my way, anyone else notice that or is it just me?

I want West Ham to go down this season and that's saying something because I never really favour anyone to go down. With the obvious exception of SHA I'm otherwise always neutral. But I think WHAM got away with murder with the Tevez situation. I have to go for SHA here for obvious reasons.

I think there is a rather sad fixation with Newcastle developed on here, yeah fair enough we don't like them, but I'm fed up of hearing about them FFS. Your doing exactly what most of you say you don't like by giving them far too much attention. I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps they are a big club? There are many on here who post about them as much as Villa.

I absolutely love this little acoustic song by the blues genius that was Lightin' Hopkins. Take Me Back

Goldfrapp - Black Cherry.

Zeppelin I and II were good, the rest? Meh. I prefer the heavy blues stuff more than the Tolkenesque folk stuff. A bugbear of mine is how often they blatantly copied people (usually old blues songs) and passed them off as their own. A lot of his folk folk stuff was, erm..... heavily influenced...... by Bert Jansch. Waggoners Lad/Bron Y Aur StompNot credited to Bert Jansch Blackwater Side/Blackmountain Side Not credited to Bert Jansch When The Levee Breaks Not credited to Memphis Minnie. Shake Em on DownInfluenced Custard Pie and Hats off to Roy Harper, Bukka White not credited for either. A bit tenuous that one - but still? Anyway.....I was listening to Elbow, who were just on Jonathan Ross, good song cant remember what it's called.

I stopped for a while and felt much better physically and mentally, concentration levels were up and I had more energy. I went out on Saturday night, had a skin full and all week I've felt shit and had no energy. I'm seriously thinking it's something I just don't need any more if it does that to me. Not drinking at home is no problem, going out is when it feels a bit weird but I don't go out as much any more so it's not too much of a problem.

Putting the price up won't solve anything. I think people will continue to drink too much regardless. As we're on the subject of alcohol personally I've been considering giving up the demon drink just recently, or at least totally cutting back my consumption to a glass of wine or a pint of beer every now and then or at xmas or family occasions.

The song which Led Zeppelin leant on/ripped off you decide? When The Levee Breaks.. Kansas Joe, Memphis Minnie

My first car was an old banger and the petrol gage did not work. I usually kept a pretty good guess of how much I had in the tank and filled up accordingly, but one time I forgot to fill up and the engine died. I was about 1-2 miles from home, which was luckily all downhill and I managed to roll all the way back to my house without an engine.

Another terrific little song from The Coral Put The Sun Back

I was hoping for 2 important signings and perhaps 1 lesser one. Now I'm now hoping for 1 important signing and perhaps a Salifou type signing. I think come the summer 3 or 4 - 'major' - signings will be required, I know we always say that, but I truly believe this summer we WILL need to get some good players in. Like with DOL's good season, I believe this season we may finish in a slightly flattering position, due in no small part to luck with injuries and good form. But the next season we did not strengthen and finished 10th, I don't want a repeat of that. We need a defender, more cover here and there and perhaps an attacking player with that little bit extra who can win games IMHO.

Yeah, good civil debate.

I'd agree with you that you could possibly achieve similar results to Spain without implementing the soft opt out by somehow reducing the family refusal rates. The more I think about the soft opt out option the less I like it, it seems pointless if your going to ask the family anyway. What would be it's purpose? to cover the NHS' ass in the event of a cock-up? My favoured option the hard opt out option has proven beyond doubt to work in Austria and Belgium, so it's pretty hard to argue against such clear results, there are no other systems which come close which I know of. I also think, as I've touched upon before, that the hard option, far from removing rights, empowers the individual and is the way forward if we truly want to get to grips with this problem.

Firstly, the term no brainer was simply me expressing the fact that from a purely personal moral standpoint, in my head, I didn't need to think very long about it. I understand that it obviously may not be so straight forward for everybody, I should have made it clear. I have no moral objection to people presuming they can take my organs if I have not exercised my right to tell them otherwise. With the Spanish soft opt out model relatives can refuse consent. Currently in Spain about 20 to 24 per cent of relatives refuse, compared with currently 40 per cent in the UK. Therefore that particular model may not work so well here. But why is the refusal rate so much higher in the UK? Are our procedures poor, are our staff poorly trained or are there other social factors such as differing attitudes to death between the Brits and Spanish? It's not so easy to say yes for sure 'soft opt out' will work in the UK. I guess your argument could be that an overhaul and improvement of the logistical system alone could have similar results without going down the opt out road. Although not my preferred option, I would support a soft opt out model with logistical improvements as has been successfully adopted in Spain. But how much that success is due to social or other factors is unknown. As I said in my previous post, I favour the hard opt out option. I don't think relatives should ever be put in a position to decide. It's unfair and often the grief stricken relatives may have to make a decision they later regret. This way the deceased individual is fully in control of what happens after death. And why do I prefer the the hard opt out and not an opt in? Well simply because it's proven to increase the number of donors available. Firstly, 90 per cent of the UK population say they'd be willing to donate their organs after death, only about 20 per cent of people have actually put their names on the NHS Organ Donor Register. God this is a difficult subject, I hope that lot makes sense!

I agree, there must be an overhaul and improvement of the logistical system, most countries which do this have an improved donation rate. However it cannot be ignored that the biggest increases have occurred in countries who have also adopted the opt out system, particularly Austria and Belgium, who have a hard opt out system in place. The Spanish soft opt out system although a success, due to additional factors cannot really be used as a solid basis to argue for or against the opt out system. The bottom line is hard opt out (in all studies I've read) improves donation rates significantly. In conclusion I'd have to say I'm for a hard opt out system. Firstly, on principal I'm not against it, presumed consent to save a life with my (useless to me) organs is fine by me, it leaves me in no moral dilemma at all, it's as they say, a no brainer. In terms of rights, the facts, as I see it are that I nor anyone else are losing any rights at all as the opt out option is available. In fact, far from taking rights away from me I believe the 'hard' system empowers me, as my relatives would not be able to overrule my decision after my death. In my case I'm sure it would reduce the stress for my close relatives should the unfortunate happen to me as they would not have a difficult decision to make during a period of grief, although this may not be the case for all. I know my family would be happy my wishes were carried out, although that is where one huge problem for the system may exists. Would doctors be happy taking organs against relatives wishes?

But this is not just anything, it saves lives. I think doing it the other way around will save lives, no brainer. As you said, you can opt out. I agree with you on that point about personal data. But you cannot lump personal privacy in with something like this and use it as an example of why opt out organ donation should not happen. Again it will save lives and nobody is being forced to do anything. The opt out option is there and I think it's a healthy caring society which presumes people want to help.