Loz

right-clicking Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Governments are ultimately responsible as to where the tax money is spent and this current mob will > happily rob the poor to pay the rich. ( benefits cut, high earners tax break) Whilst I agree with the general sentiment of this thread's general conclusion, lets not go for Guardian semantics here. No one is 'robbing' the poor and 'paying' the rich. The rich are still net contributors and the poor still net beneficiaries from the tax take. Whilst I think lowering the 50% tax band was a poor political move (and falling for the obvious trap set by Labour 17 days before leaving office), calling a tax reduction 'paying' the rich a bit of a weird way of looking at things.

Unless it is in contravention of the train operators terms and conditions (which I doubt), then as you are in a public place he has every right to sketch whomever he wants. Or even (gasp!) photograph!

What was the contravention code on the PCN?

Councils routinely reject appeals out of hand. Taking it to PATAS is the only real method of appeal.

I am always rather bemused that people see CCTV as some sort of wonder panacea for crime. In reality, they are pretty ineffective for the cost. Retro fitting them to the 55,000 ATMs in the UK would be a disaster as well. One way thieves get your PIN is by installing cameras near/on ATMs, If people start expecting a camera to be pointing at them, then they will be less likely to be suspicious if that camera is not kosher.

At 10 seconds a word, I make that 142 hours of solid work. Poor kid. Hope you bought him an ice-cream or something.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It never ceases to amaze me how such a motley crew of self-important, narcissistic onanists manages > to be so utterly judgmental and dismissive of others God, the irony is overwhelming...

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > tell me more about these "lefties" - its sounds fascinating. The Guardian can help you here. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/shortcuts/2013/apr/14/old-lefties-back-old-insults Not the article itself, but the spectacular (leftie) bile in the comments section. Truly awesome.

How the hell did that get past the naughty words filter?!?!?

Are you sure on that one, steveo?

Latest news: Big Ben to be silenced for Maggie's funeral. I starting to think there is a special committee convened for this. The 'How Can We Really Annoy The Lefties Next' committee. And they are doing a excellent job.

Or 'tow the line' instead of the correct 'toe the line'.

Decimate: Used to mean to kill one tenth (a punishment meted out to misbehaving Roman garrisons). Now means to nearly obliterate.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Marmora Man Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Tonight's BBC News: 300 - 500 protesters at > > Trafalgar Square, scarcely a mass demonstration of > > support for the obsessed left? > > > Actually authoritative estimates of who turned up are between 2,000 - 3,000. Plus don't forget the > protests in Liverpool, Belfast, Glasgow etc. Coincidentally, 3000 is about the average crowd at a Cheltenham Town match this year. That's how big that is. Hardly the Manchester United of protests, was it?

I think Snorky just Godwinned the thread.

woodrot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > it was a toungue in cheek piss take of Thatcher bro. a weak one, but still a piss take.whoever is > paying out their hard earned cash for this ( not benefit scrounger commies migrant layabouts > blates) doesnt seem to get this. So yeah, people haven't quite got what they meant, but hey, they'll take the cash anyway. A truly Thatcherite sentiment.

"If this is a high entry in the Chart Show on Sunday, we would expect to play the song as there are no editorial reasons not to play it," the BBC said in a statement. Not surprising, as celebrating a dead person, even a controversial one, isn't offensive like the sentiment behind the 'Ding Dong' song.

Number 6 on the iTunes chart... and rising. I reckon Maggie supporters, on account of having more money generally, might just get this to number 1 next week.

Speeding up laptop performance? I always slip an extra tenner into her garter belt. Oh, hang on...

Maybe Otta, but I genuinely have no idea what that paragraph meant. He's not PM'd me, so I don't know what he means by asking me privately. I've not (AFAIK) commented on Hillsborough before. And what is a 'Deanne'?

Atticus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz is veering towards stuff discussed on previous threads. I took issue with his callous comments > and have asked him to continue the Deanne privately to save the likes of yourself having to > suffer it once again. I really have no idea what this means. What are you on about, Atticus?

Jackson is conveniently forgetting that Thatcherism pretty much underpinned the ideology of the Labour government, 1997-2010, of which she was part of. I don't recall her resigning the Labour whip at any stage.

Atticus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Perhaps you should have watched it instead of making smart arsed comments. What... too soon?

I tend to agree, SJ. But on the other hand, the country was in such a mess it needed a pretty headstrong leader to push through the massive changes needed. And yes, she bulldozered through with some bad things too - I don't think many could argue otherwise. What is the current count of u-turns for the current lot? I think I read 47 so far the other day. They didn't even have the cojones to follow through on a tax on pasties, for goodness sake! Like her or hate her, at least you know what she stood for and what you were getting. There are few top-level politicians you can say that about. Certainly not Cameron, Osborn, Clegg, Miliband, Balls, etc, etc.

numbers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mick Mac Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- >> Its a simple point, "dont speak ill of the dead" is a nonsense. Hitler was a complete @#$%&. >> There I've done it, I've spoken ill of the dead. I feel terrible. > > Yes Mick Mac I have grasped that its a simple point. I have spoken ill of the dead like you. I > don't feel terrible. But thats not quite what I meant when in my poorly explained previous post. > (to be fair, no-one understood me when trying to explain it IRL so perhaps I'm talking bollocks) I think there is a difference between Hitler, Bin Laden etc. dying. Their deaths stopped bad things from happening. Somehow, the death of a little old lady with Alzheimers didn't really change the world. > what I'm trying to say is that all this "you mustn't speak ill of the dead" is being deliberately > used by people who either wish to suppress criticism of Thatcher/Thatcherism or by those who are eager > and delighted to boot the in no matter what 'the thought police' say. nah, I'm prob still not making sense. my head hurts. I don't think anyone is trying to suppress criticism of Thatcherism. But people aren't reaching for that sort of debate by doing things like trying to get 'Ding Dong The Witch is Dead' to the top of the charts, are they?