Otta

Here's another one. Turns out they're all over the place. m.moneymarketing.co.uk/160546.article?mobilesite=enabled They're also reports, rather than just articles about specific cases, which you think constitutes evidence (because you're an idiot).

www.fsa. gov.uk/.. /mortgage_fraud .pdf " Mortgage fraud became a feature of the pre- 2007 lending boom" There you go, if you need specifics. You really can't read between lines, or understand that it is possible to have more than one guilty party, can you? What an idiot you are. Poor thing.

m.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/sep/02/mortgage-application-cheats-hmrc?cat=money&type=article www.lawsociety.org.uk/productsandservices/practicenotes/mortgagefraud.page en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_fraud m.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/30/mortgage-fraud-increase?cat=business&type=article There you go UDT, that should get you started.

Do you know for a fact it wasn't? Anyway, he was booked on the night, so there will be no further action.

How do you know his two nans don't share a flat?

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dalglish asked by Sky after game about the lift > given to Liverpool by Suarez return, he said he > should never have been missing. Really? Oh dear. That is a bad response. Whatever his views, even if he believes Suarez was harshly treated, he should let it go now and move on.

Atticus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Phew, for a moment there, I almost forgot what a > nice guy Suarez really is... I won't deny that that kick was anything other than WTF.

Well not the win for the pool, but I quite enjoyed that.

Tonight's match could be a cracker (which probably means it'll be dull). Spurs have well and truly taken over Arsenal and Liverpool this season, and are playing some great stuff. Liverpool are in some good form, and have Suarez back. Hopefully there will be goals and entertainment... Now that seems like a good reason to head to the pub and put an end to my month long dry spell.

Indeed.

Liverpool will be gutted, they've got a rep to protect.

Just to clarify, we'd all love to live in a worl of equality, and stuff, but as long as there are leaders, ther will be rich and poor. Even if the poor overthrew the rich, it would only be a matter of time before the poor became the rich, and it all started again.

Now lots of those are very good ideas (except number 4, it would be a bloody disaster), but can you honestly see ANY government being able to pull that off? If you released that as your election manifesto, lots of people would applaud it, and you'd win the votes of many many students, but real people in real jobs, whatever class they belong to, wouldn't be able to vote for you, because of real life. But redistributing wealth is a noble cause.

"don't know any better" This is UDT's label for everyone who disagrees with him. So, that's basically everyone.

UDT, why are you not filthy rich?

I don't think anyone is suggesting the banks are the innocents, just that individuals also need to hold their hands up if they fraudulently obtained a mortgage that they never should have had. To acknowledge that doesn't mean you're saying all the bankers were innocents.

I don't expect him to go down either. Would be bloody funny though.

Until 'arry goes daaaaaan.

A cynic might suggest that the euros have something to do with it... "Anyway I think it should be taken away because he's a first class plonker!" True dat.

He's as old as Gerrard & Co. Nothing wrong with a young captain who can grow more and more in to the role. The whole Terry thing is troubling. The case should NEVER have been put back until after the euros. However, being as it has been put back, is it right that he be punished in any way, before having his day in court? If we as a country are going to live by "innocent until proven guilty", then surely until he is found guilty in a court, he shouldn't be punished. IF he is found innocent at trial, the FA will have egg on their faces. Personally I don't think he should ever have been given the armband back in th first place, but he was, and I'm not sure it's right to strip him of it because he's been accused of something.

Anyway, having now read the rest of the thread... Not that Damian did do that in the first place, but calling anyone ridiculous, when you've said Frankly beggars belief. You are very very special UDT.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > old Estonians are made Knights. > > Estonians? Ha ha, must check what my phone is writing in future!

First post on this, and haven't read the whole thread. But going waaaaaaaay back, Is this a joke? The honours system is the biggest old boy's club going! A person who does real good and makes a real difference is given an MBE / OBE, whilst football managers, business men turned TV stars, and old Estonians are made Knights. Doesn't take a shadey banker to bring that in to disrepute, it's already disreputable.

I think a real issue is that some parents who send their 3 year olds to ballet classes actually expect them to be doing serious ballet, rather than being 3 year olds and having fun, which is what 3 year olds should basically be doing. Frankly, I wouldn't want my daughter at a class where she was expected to behave beautifully.

Whilst the points from newcomer & Marie81 are fair enough, the point is that the teacher should have a word and be honest of she thinks this child isn't really suitable for the class, and gibe a refund. Any parent who has an issue about it, should first be brave enough to speak to you, and if they can't bring themselves to do that, theyt should have a word with the teacher. No excuse at all for shouting at the child, end of! (I know nobody was saying there was an excuse for shouting at the child by the way)