JoeLeg

kibris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As long as people give this man things he will not > be moving anywere and then when his mates turn up > and start to camp you will say I CANT WAIT FOR HIM > TO BE MOVED Yeah, because his plight and destitution really causes you so much trouble. Bet you can't sleep at night, eh?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is light at the end of the tunnel > (literally) > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3394807/Li > ght-bulbs-banned-EU-make-comeback-breakthrough-mea > ns-use-energy.html Well, hopefully but not yet; still at the experimental stage. Also that article is great at demonstrating how people will happily ignore a very good law that is designed to help save money and the planet, just because they prefer a different kind of light! Perfect example of the narrow minded thinking that dominates so many. But it's the Daily Mail, so it must be right...

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It sounds like a crime disaster area waiting to > happen. > Our minimal local Police effort will be sucked > into this one proposed new establishment if > built. Got any evidence for this? Because right now I'm with Abe - you sound pretty Nimbyish. > > The current pub is already disturbing local > residents The pub was there first. People who move near a pub and are then surprised at noise need to take a look at themselves first. - compounding it with 47 people living > in dormitories isn't going to make that any better > and quite likely significantly worse. This bit is a fair point, and I hope Cherry Tree have a plan in place. I agree that while the pub was there first, the hostel wasn't.

I thought the current vogue was for sashimi of the breast, and baking the legs in dry-cured Sussex hay?

All good points Sue; I'm plainly not supporting his actions. I'm simply playing 'Devil's Advocate' over the motivations. This is essentially racial profiling, which is a massive ethical black hole. I admit I haven't seen any links to more detail or tried to google it up, which I will later tonight, but based on what I've read in that crowdfunder the guy mounting the challenge is obviously aware that not everyone understands how it works with angling in the UK. I guess I'm sympathetic to the predicament of someone who presumably has seen his stocks decline and feels he has to take drastic measures. I was initially furious, but then I asked myself what would I do? Presumably (and I'm making an assumption here) he has already tried the police. I doubt that what he's doing is legal, and I suspect it could be overturned in court - and it should be, for the sake of precedent if nothing else - but that doesn't change the fact that the owner is also a victim of crime. As I say, this is racial profiling and that never ends well. Personally I don't see how this can end well in any event because the owner can always respond that he is taking steps to protect his property. Immoral, racist, unethical and probably illegal steps, but there's plenty of media that will support him unfortunately. I really have no idea how you resolve something like this.

This is something I wondered about. A few years ago I read an article about a strawberry farmer who found that a small number of Eastern European families were turning up to his pick-your-own fields with cream, sugar and bowls and sitting down to stuff themselves before purchasing a desultory amount of fruit. It was only a tiny amount of repeat offenders but it was enough to damage his already slender margins to the extent that he had to plough in the whole lot. I should mention that the point of the article was about financial difficulties facing soft fruit growers, it was pre-referendum and the farmer is question he no axe to grind against immigrants, he simply couldn't absorb that level of pilfering. This sounds similar - carp is a popular fish in Eastern Europe, particularly Hungary which uses it on a fish soup at Christmas. None of that is an excuse for theft of course, just as it is not an excuse for that appalling sign. That said, if people are taking fish from a 'catch and release' lake, then the owner may have a legitimate greivance. I certainly don't ateee with how he's chosen to deal with it, but just as it's not possible to police a pick-your-own farm, what is he supposed to do? I'm not sure what the answer is. On the one hand he's apparently the victim of theft, and on the other he's responded in a repulsive manner.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You deliberately miss the point of DulwichFox's > post Rendel. > > He or she was criticising what was obviously > attention seeking on the part of the mother (look > at me ... I've got a baby). She was sitting at the > bar. There was no need to breastfeed her baby > there. Do you not think - in this day and age - that creating rules about where someone can breastfeed is ethically dubious to say the least? > There may well be psychological reasons behind > this - vulnerable new mother, has given up a > career to bring up children, feels like she's > losing her identity etc etc None of which you can know without asking, and frankly you'll be told quite rightly that it's none of your business, and in the end parents - particularly first time parents - are having a hard enough time getting to grips with it all that maybe we could just let this slide? The 'breastfeeding mafia' cause far more trouble for mothers who elect to use bottles than they do to the rest of us. I honestly don't understand why anyone cares.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Breast Feeding in public is Fine..... > > ... except when its used as a deliberate > Exhibition of Progressiveness. > > I have seen Women sitting at the Bar in a Pub > Breast feeding when there are more suitable > facilities. > I don't mean the Toilets.. I'm talking about > seating within the Bar area. > > Your Child has the Right to Privacy and Dignity > too. > > DulwichFox This is right up there with some of the biggest nonsense I've ever seen from you. The child is HUNGRY. As soon as we start telling mothers there are limits on when and where they can FEED THEIR CHILDREN it's a hop, skip and a jump to some really nasty social parameters. What next, shall we lock them away during memstruation? This are babies we're talking about, not badly supervised toddlers.

Foxy, if you'd only once been there, how do you know what it was like? Oh never mind, it's like arguing with my mother-in-law...

But we aren't talking here about adults with cans of lager, or smelly takeaway food, or the table next Toby ou in a restaurant swearing loudly. When an infant needs to be fed...well, it needs to be fed. If the mother has decided to to breast feed then that's what she has to do. It's feeding a small, helpless child, I'm not really sure what there is to be offended by?

Typically for you Glen darling, you have completely missed the point. The point is that - unless the worker CHOOSES - no one can be forced to work more than 48 hour, plus there are rules about minimum time between shifts and mandatory paid breaks. The question is, will we lose such protection under Brexit, and I ask you directly, are you ok with that? The French have nothing to do with it, and never did, but it's noteworthy that you can't resist finding a way to blame immigrants for something even though it has nothing to do with the issue of British workers rights. .

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > Here we go again the politics of envy- ALL > politicians are self-serving - Indeed, but you condemn those who disagree with you as selfish and excuse those like Farage. You're a hypocrite. although Mr Farage > made good before he went into politics...Mr Farage > is to be commended for actually speaking the TRUTH > about what is going on The truth?! Ah hahaha haaaa! He's on record as making political hay out of JocCox's murder, is reviled by most Leave politicians, happily spouted nonsense about ?350 million for the NHS and then THE DAY AFTER the vote went back on it, told people the Turkish were coming when any cursory investigation shows hat to be a lie, and told everyone that if it 52% in favour of Remain then it was "not over", yet somehow doesn't think the same applies the other way. even your precious > Remaniac MPs were rebuked for threats made to > other MPs... Link please. Plus when the Daily Mail calls judges and elected officials traitors I feel your side has precious little high ground to stand on. but then after reading all the libtard > rants on here Ah, childish insults. Not particularly well done either, 2/10, try harder if you want to get me annoyed. Mostly I just laugh at you these days. it does not surprise me. Of course not, you seek confirmation bias everywhere. > When you have got your heads out of Corbyn's > backside you too may listen and find out what is > REALLY going on. And what is that exactly? Do tell, I'm agog to hear what such a denizen of education can teach us. Though given that you claim to only read Private Eye I suspect you to be one of those who just makes it up in his own head, without distracting himself with facts or dissenting opinion.

Do you have a link for that Blah? I've long believed that the main reason people like James Dyson are behind Brexit is because they want to curtail workers rights and take things back towards pre-union times. I feel the destruction of workers rights is one of the greatest risks of Brexit. When was Gove alleged to have said this?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh dear- Mr D Whitely should find something better > to occupy his time with- although if that is his > photo then he obviously HASN'T got anything better > to occupy his time with! Oh dear - have you not worked out that Nigel Farage is a lying, bigoted, self-serving manipulator? Have you not worked out that he actually embraces the type of hate which you profess to detest? Cognitive dissonance can be SUCH a cross to bear, can't it? You poor thing...

Keano mate, so you're saying - if I understand correctly - that if you have the money you should only use formula and bottles in public? Well, that's a...viewpoint, certainly.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > first place- to plunder. > > > > Industry? We screwed ourselves there, by > refusing > > to recognise that the rest of the world was > > outpacing us. I'm a big fan of unions, but even > I > > know that in the 70's and 80's they did a lot > of > > damage through believing they were invincible. > > > > I'm sure you meant this to be a balanced view but > I think this needs further comment. This was a > different world. Large private companies, massive > state sector, trade unions negotiating terms and > conditions was right and made sense. Trade unions > were born of a time when workers were being killed > and mutilated in factories, mills and pits with no > protections and no compensation. > > They are membership organisation and express the > will of the membership. They are not an evil > entity. Of course in the 60s and 70s the tens > millions of members were often more militant and > had much greater expectations. Essentially the > product was crap, the working practices crap, > production was crap, and we were suffering from > years of sitting our haunches not investing and > moving with the times. British motorcycle > industry a prime example. > > And even that is a gross generalisation as it is a > crime that areas were we were world leaders and > had invested, railway technology, aviation some > elements of computing, we lost our competitive > advantage. > > Anyway I am ranting. Brexit will not bring us > back to some rose tinted view of British > manufacturing from the 1950s to mid 60s. So apart > from overstating the impact of the unions very > much agreeing. Just to be clear, I was only commenting on what the unions had become by the mid-70's. It's my belief that an awful lot of hard work in the field of workers rights and safe working practices was wasted.

Cue the howls of outrage from media and individuals who believe parliament should just rubber stamp whatever Davis says. I'm constantly astonished by those who clamoured for UK sovereignty to be paramount, who then become furious when MP's actually do just that.

Cardelia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- But they're clearly not of a > *consistently* high standard (as a glance at > Tripadvisor will show), and they're not in the > same league for quality as some of the restaurants > mentioned above. Please please please do not rely on Tripadvisot for ANYTHING. As the recent 'Shed' restaurant in East Dulwich should show, it's easy to fool that website. It's generally ridiculed by the restaurant industry, with many tales of customers being caught lying, fake reviews and generally hilariously innacurate accounts of stuff that just never happened. I've personally witnessed a customer who was refused any more alcohol because they were so drunk they could hardly stand declare that they were going to go home and tell lies about us online. And they did! We thought it hilarious... Seriously, that website has long since lost what credibility it might have once had.

natty01295 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They are Real Scum Anyway !!! > Hate that stupid hospital And the Stupid Staff I appreciate you have strong reasons for feeling that way. From my experience they've saved my mums life twice and my wife's life once.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'd cut ALL foreign aid NOW and spend this money > on the needs of the UK. What was it Mattis told the Senate? Oh yes, "If you're not going to fund the state dept properly then I need to buy more ammunition" Foreign aid is a remarkably complex beast. No doubt parts of it get lost and stolen, but it's nowhere near as cut and dried an issue as some here are making it out to be. We desperately need to fund the NHS properly, but it requires a mental shift in people understanding how modern medecine works and how expensive it is.

apbremer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And we are frittering away ?1BN per month on the > fatuous foreign aid programme. just to show the > world how virtuous and caring we are. What a bunch > of idiots run this country. I'm not sure you understand how the foreign aid programme actually works.

Trinity. Trinity all day long. Go to Trinity. It's fantastic, and worth every penny.

uncleglen Wrote > No- the UK needs its control back...we have been > scuppered on industry, farming and fishing by the > EU and that is probably why they let us in in the > first place- to plunder. Industry? We screwed ourselves there, by refusing to recognise that the rest of the world was outpacing us. I'm a big fan of unions, but even I know that in the 70's and 80's they did a lot of damage through believing they were invincible. Farming? This country needs to wake up and smell the coffee where it's food supply chain is concerned. I don't think you know what you're talking about there. Fishing? Yeah, I'll partly give you that one. But I would also point to the rise of the industrialisation of the industry which has forced many of the day boats out of business, which is a sign of the times, and nothing to do with the EU. > The EU is, in the main, an unelected bunch of > useless very expensive gravy-train bureaucrats. Riiiiiight, because no civil service anywhere is beyond reproach? You are aware sure that Thatcher described Yes Minister as being pretty accurate? > Much of the money given to Eastern Europe has > disappeared because of corruption - FACT Not saying you're wrong, but you have a proven track record of hating immigrants. Link for evidence please? > As a born cynic I believe there is a hard core of > politicians who are remainers because they are > having a cushy time of it under the EU. Well, firstly for a 'born cynic' you seem remarkably positive about how Leaving is going to work out for us. Secondly, I think it suits your view to believe that those whose opinions differ from you are only in it for the money. For some reason anyone who disagrees with you is some kind of selfish prick. > We have NOT benefited as a country in the EU- > individuals in cities, especially London, have > benefited greatly This is hugely innaccurate, as even a cursory glance at the distribution of EU grants will show. As Blah has pointed out, the relative prosperity of the south east is much more to do with government policy and supports my point that many Leave voters, particularly you, blame immigrants for problems that we made ourselves. if you look at the voting map > for the referendum you will see the areas that > voted remain and they are all rich areas. The > Sandbanks area of Poole in Dorset is noticeable. And if governments had been more willing to address the problems at home it would be different. The EU is not responsible for domestic policy. > We will always have been ready. But this is manifestly untrue. We are not ready for this level of complex negotiations. The EU was just > prepared to be the thieving bunch of dictators and > pirates that they always have been. Why oh why do you think they would do anything other than behave with their own interests at heart? I genuinely don't understand why you think they should be otherwise? Of course they're going to drive an imsanely hard bargain, of course they're going to try and screw us. And so will every other nation who we deal oth. You seem to believe that he EU are particularly bad; they're not, they're a political organisation like any other, willing to screw over the other guy in their own best interests. And you think they're bad?! Wait till we deal with the USA! Honestly, you seem to love in a world where you think the UK is owed something. We aren't.

Quite possibly. Might there also be a dawning recollection amongst Leavers that we have bitten off waaaaay more than we can chew right now? And that possibly we weren't ready? The EU is a lot of things, not all of them good. But one of the things they plainly were was 'more prepared than us'.

Keano, everything you say makes sense, but I can't help feeling that - as Rendell points out - there's a certain amount of cognitive dissonance on the part of many Leave voters who seem to believe that we should stick two fingers up to the EU and plow on regardless, while at the same time insisting that the EU somehow cut us a nice deal. We're Leaving, that much is plain; beyond a cetain pragmatism they're under no obligation to show us any special favours. Of course they'll be up to every trick - so will the USA when we talk to them, and at least the EU doesn't want a big fat slice of the NHS, which America certainly will! On short, I don't really understand why you're surprised that they aren't being nicer to us. On one point we certainly agree - those in charge of negotiating all this are not up to it. I recall the day after the vote, a prominent Leave supporting MP asserting to Faisal Islam that it was the responsibility of the govt to have a plan for Leaving, that the Leave campaign didn't have to have one! Well, the Leave comapaign most. Ertainly should have had one. They didn't, not even a sniff of one, and now we may pay the price for that. There's a lot of people who think we should walk away and demand to be treated nicely. I would say the Leave campaign did an awful job of educating them to the reality of how complex and fraught this task is. But of course they didn't, because to do so would have been to admit the possibility that things aren't automatically milk and honey.