Huguenot

Well sorry for being so vitriolic, I was in a bad mood. I found him very menacing, but in hindsight I appreciate my visceral reaction to him may have highlighted the worst interpretation of his intent.

Well sorry for being so vitriolic, I was in a bad mood. I found him very menacing, but in hindsight I appreciate my visceral reaction to him may have highlighted the worst interpretation of his intent.

It was a long time ago, and I thought it was a pm - whether it was a pm or a public thread is quibbling. I rather think that those who felt it was bad form to quote a pm would be satisfed it was a thread? That thread wasn't the only one, but it's a typical example. He made similar insinuations on other threads. I don't think that someone making enquiries about my 'safety' is doing so to quell anxieties, do you? If you think I'm taking him the wrong way then fine, but I really don't see that the suggestion we should return to fifties culture as a thinly veiled re-working of 'blacks out' could be interpreted as anything but nasty. Quids, you're an apologist for someone who believes in racial profiling. Conversely I'm highlighting insinuations that were made persistently over a long period. Who's committing the greater crime here?

It was a long time ago, and I thought it was a pm - whether it was a pm or a public thread is quibbling. I rather think that those who felt it was bad form to quote a pm would be satisfed it was a thread? That thread wasn't the only one, but it's a typical example. He made similar insinuations on other threads. I don't think that someone making enquiries about my 'safety' is doing so to quell anxieties, do you? If you think I'm taking him the wrong way then fine, but I really don't see that the suggestion we should return to fifties culture as a thinly veiled re-working of 'blacks out' could be interpreted as anything but nasty. Quids, you're an apologist for someone who believes in racial profiling. Conversely I'm highlighting insinuations that were made persistently over a long period. Who's committing the greater crime here?

Bendy buses have a capacity of 120 people. A modern DD takes 85. Hence not exactly 'at least 2 double deckers'.

Bendy buses have a capacity of 120 people. A modern DD takes 85. Hence not exactly 'at least 2 double deckers'.

Point taken. Stands admonished. :-$

Point taken. Stands admonished. :-$

I think it's a demonstration of the craziness of religion that believers equate a suggestion that it stems from inadequacy with the threat of homicidal gang rape. This is nuts, absolutely nuts. This is why the religious burn heretics on stakes, and some are trying to do that again here. For those that interpret my moniker with an apology for religion, it's quite the opposite. All hail St. Bartholomew. There is no God, only politics.

I think it's a demonstration of the craziness of religion that believers equate a suggestion that it stems from inadequacy with the threat of homicidal gang rape. This is nuts, absolutely nuts. This is why the religious burn heretics on stakes, and some are trying to do that again here. For those that interpret my moniker with an apology for religion, it's quite the opposite. All hail St. Bartholomew. There is no God, only politics.

TLS is a man who wanted to select where to house his family on the basis that the skin colour of the neighborhood defines its criminality. What the hell is going on in the UK that people think it's okay to say that? I mean really, what is going on in people's heads? WTF? There's no room for that in society, regardless of a forum. TLS just sent me a PM too, but it make me ask myself how crazy he is? His views are absolutely noxious. He slanders 4 billion people by saying that skin colour defines criminality, and then says he's offended? He's offended? If people think that's a 'lover not a fighter' then I despair. There's no more value in that observation than in the residents of Buchenwald saying that the Kommandant down at the camp made a lovely cup of tea. It's sick and its twisted. The fact that it's Tunbridge Wells bumptiousness doesn't make it cute or cuddly. As for being a liar, guess what, it didn't end on a PM it went straight to the thread. This the the spat where TLS brought up the issue of my 'safety' and 'suffering the consequences'. I actually asked him "live on line" whether he had just threatened me. I didn't feel that the observation was bad form because it came into the threads. As per usual TLS swerved it, but where I come from the question "do you want to come down and meet my mates" is absolutely explicit. It's school playground viciousness. It's saying 'you don't disagree just with me, but with my back-up, and you're going to meet them.'. I also remember with absolute clarity the screechy harpies who try to get off on a 'technicality' like they're negotiating with teacher. The ones who don't apologise for nasty acts, the ones who yowl 'prove it, prooove it', because they think they're smart. Other people are absolutely entitled to their own interpretation. But both myself and TLS knew what he meant, and so do most people.

TLS is a man who wanted to select where to house his family on the basis that the skin colour of the neighborhood defines its criminality. What the hell is going on in the UK that people think it's okay to say that? I mean really, what is going on in people's heads? WTF? There's no room for that in society, regardless of a forum. TLS just sent me a PM too, but it make me ask myself how crazy he is? His views are absolutely noxious. He slanders 4 billion people by saying that skin colour defines criminality, and then says he's offended? He's offended? If people think that's a 'lover not a fighter' then I despair. There's no more value in that observation than in the residents of Buchenwald saying that the Kommandant down at the camp made a lovely cup of tea. It's sick and its twisted. The fact that it's Tunbridge Wells bumptiousness doesn't make it cute or cuddly. As for being a liar, guess what, it didn't end on a PM it went straight to the thread. This the the spat where TLS brought up the issue of my 'safety' and 'suffering the consequences'. I actually asked him "live on line" whether he had just threatened me. I didn't feel that the observation was bad form because it came into the threads. As per usual TLS swerved it, but where I come from the question "do you want to come down and meet my mates" is absolutely explicit. It's school playground viciousness. It's saying 'you don't disagree just with me, but with my back-up, and you're going to meet them.'. I also remember with absolute clarity the screechy harpies who try to get off on a 'technicality' like they're negotiating with teacher. The ones who don't apologise for nasty acts, the ones who yowl 'prove it, prooove it', because they think they're smart. Other people are absolutely entitled to their own interpretation. But both myself and TLS knew what he meant, and so do most people.

Maybe at last there'll be some sanity to the entire debate. I trust that the 'delegation' will act rationally and listen to both sides of the story. At the moment the highly polarised attitude smacks of no realistic solution. And I also trust that no idiot will suggest that I must work for a rail company just for making this observation.

Sympathise Texas, but you're aware that a tree can bring down a house? I've been on the wrong side of a naughty tree, and you think very differently when it can destroy your life ;-)

Chomp my Chunkynormous?

Morecambe and Wise. Bloody Philistines. *Edited to apologise for a misunderstanding, there's a few posts below this, and apologies for that* I caught the odd unedited BBW post, and can vouch for the fact that his edited version was much the wittier. I know that I'm a vicious little snipe, but have invested both the good grace and awareness to self-edit (you should see some of what comes out before I post!). I can appreciate that Admin would have found the endless nappy washing of BBW a little tedious. Keef, it's really exasperating. I can see the need for an alternative voice. On the blinkin' church/cinema thread you did the same thing. There isn't an effing clique to compete against. You manufacture this entity in order to give yourself a debating position - is this about school or something? Sometimes you can have a view without putting a red under the bed. Having said that, if the world was ending, I couldn't think of two people I'd rather sit at the bar with than you and Piersy ;-) Mind you, you probably wouldn't have me!

STAMPS FOOT. I want to see the article about the motorcycle trip. :)

I'm guessing that it's just convenient. Why do we die?.... That's God innit. Why do we live?.... Well, God How does the remote control work?.... God Why does shit happen?.... God.... errr....'s testing you. Why are other people nasty?.... God. And Lizards. Both. If I'm a control freak and need to find meaning in everything where will I find it?.... GOD. If I'm so pathetically inadequate I need to abdicate responsibility for everyday decisions where can I turn?.... Well...

Is sandy_rose related to the Sandra Tate who designed the Riverford website? It may explain not so much a journalistic bent as a PR one ;-) Apologies of course if there's no connection!

Not necessarily, there can be many reasons for buying your own kit (such as status or pride) that have nothing to do with the quality of the original. We may buy ourselves a fountain pen for work, but it doesn't mean the biros don't work. That's not saying I know anything about it, just observing that the issue may not be black and white.

I was quoting from Snopes, they weren't my words. The 'classic case' refers to the frequency with which this takes place (ref. the first paragraph). I think they make the point that this quote appears to have been invented long after Einstein's death, and attributed to him for convenience. Hence the association with Einstein confers no merit. It also suggests that it may be commercially/politically driven and have little basis in truth. None of us are scientists, so it's a little difficult to know if the 2m is valuable or not - do you have anything other than a misappropriated Einstein quote? Overall the suggestion is that the beekeepers are making mountains out of molehills. Try this article. All the bees aren't dead, they're just undergoing a bit of a pounding from a new-ish parasite. The beekepers themselves only estimate the value of damage to be 150m, which in an economy of 2.3 trn isn't exactly our number one priority. The max requested even by the beekeepers is 8m quid over 5 years, so I don't think it's unreasonable for DEFRA to allocate 2m and then review developments later? It's altogether likely that this is just another one of those red herrings put about by the lunatic fringe of the eco-movement that brings them into disrepute. I've no doubt that there are individuals on the forum that will see this as yet another sign of the end of the world, but in taking such extreme views they marginalise themselves.

I'm sorry Steady Eddy, but your two documents didn't support your case. The Association of British Drivers was unsupported conjecture - a political polemic not a study. The Police Review contradicted the ABD by explaining that speed humps slowed traffic that in turn limited accidents, and that there was no evidence of undue speeding between humps. The police also recommended that humps were introduced according to traffic studies rather than politics (something our local council has manifestly done). The police observed hypothetically that damage could be done to vehicles, but admitted they had no evidence. The police observed that there were other traffic calming systems but made no statement about comparative effectiveness. In fact the only complaint was that they always seemed to be late in the consulting process, but at no time suggested they were not consulted nor that their complaints weren't heard or acted upon. Why would you present these two documents as evidence of your case? You've willfully misinterpreted them. Is the real case that you don't want any regulation because you believe that your freedom to drive with abandon is more important than the rest of us poor citizens?

"Highest military spending in Europe..." That's kind of moot: Percentage of GDP on military spending: UK 2.4% France 2.6% Greece 4.3% (Singapore 4.9%) I can't think of a single thing those Frenchies have done with their armageddon cash! I feel sorry for the TA, as most of the guys I knew who did it didn't seem to realise they were about to spend 6 months in Iraq for something they originally associated with a good weekend piss-up. Perhaps that was being taken into account?

I shall be forced to spend 10 days in Nepal. *folds arms*

Not at all old chap, leave the little fellows to make their own mind up when they're old enough to do so. Besides 'indoctrinate... a secular belief system' is an oxymoron, there isn't a 'secular' doctrine. Secular is defined by not being of a particular religion - or not of a belief system. Hence you can't 'indoctrinate' people to be secular, you can only have an absence of religion.