Loz

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Germany and Spain just scraping through to the next round. I think England, with their variation > in attack and defensive barreir, has a great chance in winning the tournament. Pffft. He he. Chuckle. http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif HAW HAW HAW!!

More bookies.

ultraburner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A skyscraper slightly taller than the shard, > please. Would put ED on the map imo. Hey, lets go for slightly higher than the Burj Khalifa. That'll really put ED on the map.

I'd like it to be warmer and sunnier here. But not too hot.

bemusED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > cause it's an anagram of HERO BEARD? ... and HEARD BORE

I don't understand one of the criteria They are currently in school, have graduated from high school, have obtained a general education development certificate, or are honorably discharged veterans of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; Does the USA really have illegal immigrants in the armed forces??

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...I am fairly, actually quite a lot, pissed on Sherry. Christmas bottle - for the MIL..she > occasionally likes a tipple, I've had nearly half a bottle as the Stella ran out on Walcott's > equaliser. > > Harvey's Bristol @#$%& Cream.....SHAME on me. Well might you be ashamed. I mean, you could at least get a nice Amontillado or Oloroso. But Bristol Cream? Ugh.

I love this - now starts the tournament national bipolar syndrome. Yesterday, a bunch of useless mugs. Tomorrow, they'll be odds-on tournament winners in the tabloids. Always fun to watch as a neutral. Anyway, man of the match: Hodgeson.

No she's not.

The problem with the term 'relative poverty' is that it is not an indicator of poverty at all, but of inequality. That's not to say that inequality is not worth measuring, just that it is a blatant lie to call it 'poverty'. It is really just an attempt to ride in on the back of a more emotional word. And, as the figures showed, wrong - as in a time of recession, how on earth can 300k children suddenly be lifted out of poverty? Oh, because rich people are earning less. It is just bloody ridiculous.

Heber gang activity

boosboss Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Half page spread on page 7 of the Metro today. > Let's hope this brings results and he's home soon. http://www.metro.co.uk/news/902158-daughter-pens-open-letter-to-confused-father-who-disappeared-a-week-ago

Proof that relative child poverty is a stupid measure... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18436795

I'd describe it more as 'WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH I DIDN'T GET MY OWN WAYYYYYYYYYY!!" (hurls toys out of pram). Not pretty.

[RoyFromITCrowd] Hurve ya troid turnen et orf an barck onnagen? [/RoyFromITCrowd]

Balls: Sit him down, give him a pointy hat and a fishing rod and... voila! A garden gnome. D Milliband. Purchased a garden gnome, called it 'Ed' and threw it off a bridge. Major: Talks to garden gnomes. Oh, yes. Thatcher: Sold all the UK's garden gnomes at a discount Clinton: Accidentally shagged a garden gnome George W: Once lost a game of chess to a garden gnome.

I've used Stevensons for fixing my boiler before and they're pretty good. We had them recommended to us by a friend.

stephen509 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is a Games Makes a nicer way to say steward? Stewards are usually paid.

Which is a lesson in why you should always buy mp3's.

Writing articles criticising the Chinese Government are deemed a criminal - indeed terrorist - activity in China. So, the comparison holds. The internet does not respect international boundaries or national laws, which is one of its strengths. The Pirate Bay maybe/maybe not considered criminal under UK law, but UK law does not apply in this case. So it's not 'criminal activity' any more that the UK-written article about China is. Make no mistake - this is (attempted, though destined to be failed) censorship of the net. This is a really, really dangerous decision that will have much wider ramifications and it has to be fought against. I really hope PB stays up and accessible (which it is so far) just to prove the point. The law will look an ass simply because it is being an ass. They may as well legislate for the sun to not rise tomorrow - that doesn't mean that law can ever be enforced. Anyway, the copyright holders have long since lost the battle. The genie is out of the lamp. They are always going to be two or three years behind the sharing technology. Torrents were easy to track; expect the next technology not to make that mistake. So, either the copyright holders find a new business model or they die. They know it, which is why, even though they initially fought against Netflix and Spotify and the like, they are now being forced to embrace the idea. The days of the ?15 back catalogue CD are coming to a close. It's a case of move with the times, or go the way of the telegraph service.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whilst on the subject of Racism let us take a look at The Union Jack. > > Symbol of Empire and Imperialism. Of Oppression and adopted by ultra right wing extreem groups of > Racists. > > It is outdated and has no place in this day and age.. Your first points are a discussion all of their own, but regarding the adoption of the Union *Flag* (!) by ultra right wing extreme groups, then I disagree. It should be reclaimed, not handed over. Abandoning it wouldn't change anything - look at how long the Confederate Flag has survived. Anyway, I though the Mall looked amazing decked out end to end with the flag. And that is coming from an Aussie. Usually British and English flag waving is a tedious exercise in breast-beating (mainly due to it being sport related), but the Jubilee weekend was just a wonderful celebration of Britishness. It was a rare joy.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In the UK Pirate Bay would be tested against mens rea (intent) and the facilitation of crime (accessory). > > Copyright infringement is a criminal offence that attracts greater penalties than theft. > > Given that they have publically stated that their intention is to facilitate piracy they'd be found > guilty on both counts. > > They can't be tried in the UK as they are subject to overseas jurisdiction. In a traditional context > these traders would be banned access for their person, goods and services the the UK border > without trial. > > That is all that has happened in this case. > > What people are trying to do is to elevate this into some greater issue about freedom as a way of > wheedling their way into keeping this crime going. > > It's foolish, childish and irrelevant. Stopping criminals from trading in the UK is a perfectly > reasonable activity for which the government have both a mandate and an obligation. > > That's it, that's all. Nobody is reading your post or stealing your life. It's no more a crisis of > freedom than sticking a bicycle thief in prison. But that is the problem of British law not being applicable internationally. What PB are doing is not a crime in Sweden. Your logic is the same used by China. If a newspaper article published in the UK criticising the Chinese government had been published in China then the author convicted of an offence and would be doing 20 years in jail. But the law is different in the UK - the article is considered legal - so instead they block it from being read. Most people call that censorship. I frankly don't care much about Pirate Bay, but I do care about the implications of this issue. Should the UK have the right to block a legal site and, if so, where does this end up? Wikileaks? How about those international sites that named all the super-injunction people? How about the French government and their ban on exit poll information? Where does it stop? What is a web site in legal terms, anyway? And how do you couch a decision to block a site? If Pirate Bay renamed themselves Pirate Cove tomorrow is the ban still in place? Changed from piratebay.com to piratebay.org? Move from server with the IP address of 1.2.3.4 to 4.5.6.7, does it still hold? Round robin DNS means the site can be on several servers in several countries and can move again at the press of a button. Twitter and Facebook and the like can be used to announce any changes. The phrase 'herding cats' springs to mind. And when that happens, more and more powers will have to be granted (and used) to a bigger and bigger detriment of people in general - again the Terrorism Act springs to mind here. Who'd have thought those laws when enacted would end up being used to eject a harmless old man from the Labour conference in 2005? But they did. Expect internet censorship to suffer the same mission creep.

paul1313 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i dont think its racist,,im just making a point of why change there name ??? ,,, not unless they > wanted to join equity and someone was already using Saxe-Coburg and Gotha which i dout,,,thats > all "well i dont no how you say god save the queen in German ,,but im sure she does". Hmmm. And why did they change? Well, as I said, they changed it in 1917. What was the big news story that year?

Actually, that's not true. George V changed the family surname from Wettin to Windsor in 1917. The dynasty was called House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and that was changed to House of Windsor at the same time. Elizabeth II's real surname is, and always has been, Windsor. Though she should really be Mountbatten-Windsor by marriage, she decided to keep 'Windsor'. Anyway, I always find that comment (and it's hardly new) more than a teensie bit racist. It's a bit like asking a black person born in Britain, "where are you *really* from". Or assuming someone whose grandparents were Chinese would speak Cantonese.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hugs is right in respect that TPB's raison d'etre is to stick it to The Man. And as such, The Man > has responded accordingly. It's a natural conclusion and a predictable result. They asked > for it.. they probably wanted it. Now move along. Well, quite. Not only is it great publicity for the site (which is still accessible) but also good publicity for the new Pirate Party political group. They already have a couple of European Parliament seats in Sweden.