Santerme

lindylou Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Money is god in this country and life is cheap. > You could murder someone or stab someone and get a > light sentence, but do not ever fiddle your tax, > rob a bank or a post office, in fact any > government money, god help you. Better to shoot > or stab someone. Lpook at the sentencing. The mandatory tariff for murder with a knife is 15 years as a starting point and with a gun 30 years.

Dege and Skinner since 1990 when I could first afford a uniform cut there Since 2004 shirts, suits and great sweaters too!

Interesting Eddie and Charlie Richardson.... They had a great little drinking den in Rushey Green Frankie Fraser Jimmy Moody, who Charlie nailed to the floor for spending protection money at Catford Dog Track I am sure I can think of some more.

I don't think Dixon of Dock Green was a documentary! Edited to say Not offended at all. Having been bought up in South London in the 60's, the idea of honour amongst thieves is a little hard to swallow.

HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Midnight Run - When Charles Grodin gives Robert De > Niro the money at the end, how could you not feel > good? > > Passport To Pimlico - The very definition of > 'pluck'. > > The Sound Of Music - The sound of eight year old > Catholic boys falling in love with Julie Andrews. > OK I own up, Catholic guilty. > > Oliver! - It's the songs. It's mainly the songs > performed by Nancy - 'As long as 'e needs me, I > know where I shall be...', 'There's a little ditty > they're singing in the city, especially when > they've been on the gin and the beer...'. ETC. > > It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World - Epicly ludicrous, > always a hoot. > > Dumbo - If for nothing else than the crows, 'I > seen a needle wink its eye...but I think I'll done > have seen everything when I see a elephant fly' > > > What's Up Doc? - Streisand and O'Neil in a > well-written farce. On top of their games. I mean > whadda ya want? > > Duck Soup - 80 odd minutes of perfect comedy. Some > of the odd minutes contain Magaret Dumont. Thanks > Margaret. Good call on Passport to Pimilco, watched it the other day, it is still plucky

Biggs was a nasty piece of human detritus as were his mates. He served 15 months then buggered off to live the life of a minor celeb, mostly the fault of the media. He returned because he needed medical treatment and the ?20,000 the Sun paid his son, he still had 28 years of his sentence left to serve. I could care less where he died in all honesty, prison or at home I guess it matters not now. I am almost 51 which hopefully qualifies me to enter the debate.

Big Fish Two Women When Harry Met Sally Life is Beautiful

Name: Organisation: Nominated By... Hugh Carnegy Executive Editor The Financial Times NPA James Green Security Publisher Jane's Information Group PPA Edmund Curran Editor The Belfast Telegraph NS Robin Esser Executive Managing Editor Daily Mail NPA Jonathan Grun Editor Press Association PA John Battle Head of Compliance Independent Television News ITN John McLellan Editor The Scotsman SDNS Michael Jermey Director of News, CUrrent Affairs and Sport ITV ITV James MacManus Executive Director News International Newspapers Ltd NPA David Jordan Director Editorial Policy and Standards BBC BBC Paul Horrocks Editor Manchester Evening News NS Bob Satchwell Executive Director Society of Editors SOE Simon Juden Chief Executive The (Book) Publishers Association PA D J Collins Director, Communications and Public Affairs - Europe, Middle East and Africa Google Jonathan Shephard Chief Executive Periodical Publishers Association Current media members of the DA notice committee. The Vice Chair is Simon Bucks from Sky News

There was an air raid siren at the top of DKH. I remember them testing it when I was at school.... I was never convinced even at that tender age, hiding under our desks would protect us from an A Bomb.

HAL9000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I realise this isn't exactly what SteveT had in > mind but the Government has a powerful array of > gagging orders at its disposal. According to > 'Freedom, the Individual and the Law' (Penguin Law > - 1991) by Harry Street (Author) and Geoffrey > Robertson (Editor), the following legislations are > used to gag individuals and the press (although > some may have been amended or rescinded since its > publication): > > Treason > Criminal Libel > Interim Injunction > Malicious Falsehood > Contempt of Court > Breach of Copyright > Obscenity > Conspiracy Offences > Official Secrets Act 1911, s1 > Public Interest Immunity Certificates > D-Notices > Blasphemy > Sedition > > A D-Notice was served in relation to myself in the > mid-80s that is still in force, as far as I know, > so I can?t talk about it ? except to say it was > probably the most bizarre thing that ever happened > to me and really opened my eyes to the level of > rampant corruption within the government and > judicial system (of England and Wales). My understanding of DA notices are that they are advisory and not binding. You seek advice on whether the information is likely to be sensitive from the secretariat, but you cannot be gagged by them.

I am not quite sure where this soldier is being fed his lines, he seems fairly intelligent and coherent, but he is 180 degrees wrong. There is much to criticise, and I would be the first in line so to do regarding the conduct of operations and the farce which represents itself to be reconstruction efforts going on in AFG, herein lies the real failing. In fact, I have done both professionally and privately to senior officers and civil servants in the MOD. To Mockney, I would say this. The idea of British armed forces personnel running riot just does not gel with the 24 odd years I served, even under intense pressure, incredible provocation and threats to their own safety, I have witnessed 18 year olds behave with a tolerance and compassion well beyond their years and maturity. They are highly trained individuals who know the strategic importance that the lowest private can have not only on an operation, but on the conduct of the whole campaign by their actions. Lynddie England at Abu Ghraib probably cost the lives of some hundreds of US personnel. What we ask of those who take up the profession of arms is that they perform their tasks with humanity. Members of the armed forces understand the inherent violence of armed conflict, characterised at an extreme by death and destruction. While troops must act resolutely, and sometimes with lethal force, the concept of humanity forbids any notion of a carte blanche or unbounded behaviour. Codes of conduct we insist upon go beyond the legal constraints of International Humanitarian Law Moreover, for the individuals who must fight on their nation?s behalf, such codes provide the reconciliation between individual morality and actions that would otherwise be entirely contrary to modern social mores. What must be remembered, is that todays battlefield has changed from the pre Westphalian days where civilain casualties were a coincidental side effect of battle, and massive field armies fought it out on pre determined arenas, to one where the conflict exists by virtue of destatization amongst the populace. It is an irrefutable fact that organised violence on behalf of the state remains a necessary evil, but it is tempered in the West by a code of ethics. Contrast this to the moral position of the asymmetry which is the character of modern conflict and those we engage with whose moral outlook is entirely alien.

You have to love the changes made in New York

I was being fake kind to him, hope that is not an offence to be banned for!!!

I listened to Tim Collins being interviewed on this subject and he almost nailed it for me. He said serving in the armed forces does not give you access to a buffet of jobs which you can pick and choose. We are a volunteer force and once in you are contracted to follow all orders given by superiors, as long as they are legal. Obviously, this individual has served in AFG before and does not want to deploy there again. If this is a case of genuine conflict with his beliefs, then I would have no problem with him not going. But I have zero sympathy for those who desert....the raw truth is someone else has had to go in your place! So you are not just saving yourself, you are endangering another by your actions. Clearly he would be a liability in theatre, perhaps he has already done enough to ensure he is never deployed again. As for legality. There are effectively two wars being fought in AFG. One is a purely American operation and the other an ISAF mission conducted under UN control with NATO providing the structure for the mission. This is conducted under a UN mandate and in cooperation with the Mayor of Kabul, sorry the President of Afghanistan. It is not a NATO mission, however, and contributing to it is voluntary, not mandatory. For the last few years the saying has been it is not NATO, but ACAB (America, Canada, Australia, Britain), which is a tad unfair to the Danes and Norwegians especially. But also to some of the countries contributing SF's too. For example, hostage rescue is invariably done by the Italians (they seriously ruin the kidnappers day), and the Germans and mountain warfare is a match made in heaven, it can completely sap your morale when you have scaled a rockface to 7,000 feet and a German in a tee shirt shoots past you barely breaking a sweat and looking down at you as a lesser mortal. Back to the point. It is arguable whether the initial invasion was legal under Article 51. Certainly since 2003 it has been and continues to be a UN sanctioned operation. If ordered to deploy, that is in my mind a legal command. I can see no defence in law to the contrary and having deserted, to me. he deserves the full force of military justice to be applied against him.

I am sorry for your loss... It is hard to discern what your concern is.

Starmix's moral compass is pretty skewed alright.

Not much call for heroics in Dorset. Last time I intervened was just off Leicester Square. My brother and I saw a teenage girl being assaulted by a couple of blokes. We eventually restrained the attackers until the police arrived, both had knives and were carted off. My brother is a Royal Marine and I had just retired from the Army, so I guess we were not too intimidated by them. I think I would do it again, at least until I felt my advancing years outweighted my ability be effective.

There is a serious issue here. These people exploit young girls from their own country and the Baltic states. My earnest suggestion would be to go to the police station to make a report. Unfortunately, the police have a great reputation for being less than subtle and the last thing you need is a patrol car turning up to take your statement and then proceeding directly to the other address.

zephyr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We went to St Jean de Monts last year with Keycamp > - it was great. Whilst there are ready set up > tents and mobile homes, there are also camping > pitches. The swimming pools was great and the kids > went swimming even on the rainy days ( thats the > Brits for you I guess) > > There are a number of sites around the town be we > went to Zagarella Have to say I enjoyed this area very much a few years ago, never camped, but there were a number of sites en route and further down in the Vendee. ST Jean has about five miles of beach. Everytime I have been is late season and there has been a lot less tourist traffic. Les Sable D'olonne is also great for this. Also have gites in Brittany, but no pool as yet, next on the list though.

Coulrophobia It is caused for me by Alice Cooper's, Can't Sleep, the Clown Will Eat Me! Or was it Pennywise?

antijen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Santerme, Where did you hear he was offered this > plea bargain, Guatanauma Bay could have been the > option. Gary is an ordinary lad, never been > involved with any political groups, yes he made a > big mistake but it was not his intention to commit > the crime he is now accused of. And we all know > America is fair and trustworthy, but scout huts or > any other soft options was not on offer. It was an offer his lawyers put to him and it was reported widely. He rejected six months of ping pong and sunshine in a low security prison and ending his sentence in a UK facility. He would have been out in six months. Hacking into military computers is not and never will be harmless. Personallly, i think he will get anything up to ten years now. From The Times July 31, 2008 Gary McKinnon stands accused of becoming the most accomplished computer hacker in history by crashing the United States army network, but claims only to have been pursuing a fascination with aliens. The 42-year-old unemployed systems analyst, who broke into US military computers from his bedroom in Wood Green, North London, faces at least ten years in a US jail. He has always claimed that he was seeking information on UFOs and aliens. He lost his final appeal against extradition yesterday after the law lords were told that he rejected a plea bargain in which he was offered a shorter prison sentence of three or four years in return for pleading guilty. The law lords dismissed Mr McKinnon?s claim that threats made against him by US prosecutors amounted to an abuse of process and refused to quash extradition procedings against him. Mr McKinnon admits accessing 97 US military and Nasa computers. US prosecutors also allege that he shut down and rendered inoperable 300 computers at a US navy weapons station at a critical time, immediately after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. His only hope is to persuade the European Court of Human Rights to put a ?stay? on proceedings, pending consideration of his case. Mr McKinnon said last night that he was sorry for his actions but felt the US reaction was disproportionate. He described his actions as ?misguided? but said it felt ?like a moral crusade?. He said he had not damaged the computer systems, as the US claimed, but had highlighted security problems. He told BBC Radio 5 Live: ?I?m extremely sorry I did it, but I think the reaction is completely overstated. I should face a penalty in Britain and I?d gladly do my time here. To go from, you know, perhaps a year or two in a British jail to 60 years in an American prison is ridiculous.? Karen Todner, his solicitor, said: ?Gary McKinnon is neither a terrorist, nor a terrorist sympathiser. His case could have been properly dealt with by our own prosecuting authorities. Instead, we believe that the British Government declined to prosecute him to enable the US Government to make an example of him. American officials involved in this case have stated that they want to see him ?fry?.? The law lords heard that under the plea bargain he would serve six to twelve months and then be returned to Britain to serve the rest of his sentence. Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood said that, in all, he might serve eighteen months to two years. However, if he were extradited and convicted, he might expect a sentence of between eight and ten years, possibly longer, and would not be repatriated at all.

computedshorty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi acroban > Can I show you this: > > Street communal shelter > In the United Kingdom, it was being recognized > early that public shelters in open spaces, > especially near streets, were urgently needed for > pedestrians and drivers and passengers in passing > vehicles, etc. The programme of building street > communal shelters commenced in March 1940, the > government supplying the materials, and being the > moving force behind the scheme, and private > builders executing the work under the supervision > of surveyors. These shelters consisted of 14-inch > brick walls and one-foot thick reinforced concrete > roofs, similarly to, but much larger than, the > private shelters in backyards and gardens being > introduced slightly later. The communal shelters > were usually intended to accommodate about fifty > persons, and were divided into various sections by > interior walls with openings connecting the > different sections. Sections were normally > furnished with six bunks. > > > The one of this type was in Jennings Road but not > as large although our school Heber Road School was > next door but for the rear Beer Garden of the > Heber Arms it was sited not in the road back a > bit. > I dont think it got used much, we children used > the Shelter that was made under the three story > small block in the seniors playgroung, this was > open on the ground floor supported on brick Piers, > so they bricked in between to enclose it as a > shelter, not very big? no there were only a > handful of us attending as most had been > evacuated, even then a psrt was for the AFS Crews > Quarters and the Taxi style Fire Engine outside, > and all the wet hoses lying in rows drying out > from their last use. I think that one of a > different type with an arched roof was in Basano > Road. > They stopped building them as they could not get a > supply of bricks. There were community shelters in the all the 'squares' of the estates up DKH, I used to play on the one where Petworth House is on Pytchley Road. One of the main reasons they were discontinued is that roof was caste in one piece and the quality of the mix was suspect from some builders, a near miss used to collapse two or three tons of concrete onto those inside.

On a personal note my father saw a V1 being shot down from a balcony on, I think it was called Gedling House, but memory fades, I will have to ask. V1's first fell mid June 1944, but went unreported as pilotless weapons until 16th when it was the third item on a BBC bulletin. The Chief Censor issued detailed instructions that, the locations of all incidents should be entirely non specific, air raid warnings in London were under no circumstances to be reported and that obituary notices for people killed were limited to three people from the same post code. The reason South London suffered was that many of the weapons had faulty gyros,leaking fuel cells, etc. Croydon was the hardest hit area of all, I believe. The effect on morale was both profound and worrying to the Govt as the earlier 'Blitz' spirit had reached an ebb. The defences brought down almost 50% of the V1's launched. Actually launching them against London rather than the staging ports for the invasion was a mistake akin to stopping the bombing of RAF airfields during the Battle of Britain. As to false inforamtion, this was fed back by the agents the German thought were still reporting accurately, in fact, every German agent who reached Britain was working for the XX Committee. It was a matter of hot debate in the War Cabinet whether to keep the aiming point short by this means. Dulwich was actually calculated as a mean point of impact, but was dismissed by Herbert Morrison as being unacceptable to keep the bombs off Mayfair by targetting the proletariat. It was one of the decisions of the War Cabinet that was never minuted throughout the whole war. During the V1 and subsequent V2 attacks half the housing stock in London was damaged and much of it rendered unfit for human habitation. The flying bombs and rockets caused fewer deaths in comparison to the ealier Blitz, but caused as much structural damage and greater short term loss of war production.

This chap was offered a plea bargain to three years, six months of which would be spend in a low grade prison in the US and the balance in the UK, probably painting Scout huts on the South coast. Now he is facing ten years. Not very bright, IMHO.

Northern Ireland still allows firearms to be purchased for self defence in your home. In England and Wales this was made illegal in 1946. I keep a couple of shotguns, licensed naturally, but I guess by the time I had found the key unlocked the cabinet and loaded one, the noise I would have made would scare them away anyway. Unfortunately Americans are slightly dumber than cow turd when it comes to guns..... A statement from Joe Horn reads, "The events of that day will weigh heavily on me for the rest of my life. My thoughts go out to the loved ones of the deceased." (KHOU) Man Shoots Intruders Audio tape of a 911 call captures a man in the act of fatally shooting two intruders at his neighbor's home. A Houston grand jury is deciding his fate. Russ Mitchell reports. (CBS) The 911 call came from a Pasadena, Tex., resident, who alerted police to two burglary suspects on a neighbor's property. Before he hung up, two men were dead by his hand. Joe Horn, 61, told the dispatcher what he intended to do: Walk out his front door with a shotgun. "I've got a shotgun," Horn said, according to a tape of the 911 call. "Do you want me to stop them?" "Nope, don't do that - ain't no property worth shooting somebody over, OK?" the dispatcher responded. "Hurry up man, catch these guys, will you? 'Cause I'm ain't gonna let 'em go, I'm gonna be honest with you, I'm not gonna let 'em go. I'm not gonna let 'em get away with this ----." Shortly after, Horn said he sees one suspect was standing in front of his house, looking at it from the street. "I don?t know if they?re armed or not. I know they got a crowbar 'cause that's what they broke the windows with. ... Man, this is scary, I can't believe this is happening in this neighborhood." He gets more agitated. The dispatcher asks if he can see the suspects but they had retreated into the target's house, out of view: "I can go out the front [to look], but if I go out the front I'm bringing my shotgun with me, I swear to God. I am not gonna let 'em get away with this, I can't take a chance on getting killed over this, OK? I'm gonna shoot, I'm gonna shoot." "Stay inside the house and don?t go out there, OK?" the dispatcher said. "I know you're pissed off, I know what you're feeling, but it's not worth shooting somebody over this, OK?" "I don?t want to," Horn said, "but I mean if I go out there, you know, to see what the hell is going on, what choice am I gonna have? "No, I don?t want you to go out there, I just asked if you could see anything out there." The dispatcher asks if a vehicle could be seen; Horn said no. The dispatcher again says Horn should stay inside the house. Almost five minutes into the call, police had not arrived. "I can?t see if [the suspects are] getting away or not," Horn said. Horn told the dispatcher that he doesn?t know the neighbors well, unlike those living on the other side of his home. "I can assure you if it had been their house, I would have already done something, because I know them very well," he said. Dispatcher: "I want you to listen to me carefully, OK?" Horn: "Yes?" Dispatcher: "I got ultras coming out there. I don't want you to go outside that house. And I don't want you to have that gun in your hand when those officers are poking around out there." Horn: "I understand that, OK, but I have a right to protect myself too, sir, and you understand that. And the laws have been changed in this country since September the First and you know it and I know it." Dispatcher: "I understand." Horn: "I have a right to protect myself ..." Dispatcher: "I'm ..." Horn: "And a shotgun is a legal weapon, it's not an illegal weapon." Dispatcher: "No, it's not, I'm not saying that, I'm just not wanting you to ..." Horn: "OK, he's coming out the window right now, I gotta go, buddy. I'm sorry, but he's coming out the window. " Dispatcher: "No, don't, don't go out the door, Mister Horn. Mister Horn..." Horn: "They just stole something, I'm going out to look for 'em, I'm sorry, I ain't letting them get away with this ----. They stole something, they got a bag of stuff. I'm doing it!" Dispatcher: "Mister, do not go outside the house." Horn: "I'm sorry, this ain't right, buddy." Dispatcher: "You gonna get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun, I don't care what you think." Horn: "You wanna make a bet?" Dispatcher: "Stay in the house." Horn: "There, one of them's getting away! Dispatcher: "That's alright, property's not something worth killing someone over. OK? Don't go out the house, don't be shooting nobody. I know you're pissed and you're frustrated but don't do it." Horn: "They got a bag of loot." Dispatcher: "OK. How big is the bag?" He then talks off, relaying the information. Dispatcher: "Which way are they going?" Horn: "I can't ... I'm going outside. I'll find out." Dispatcher: "I don't want you going outside, Mister..." Horn: "Well, here it goes buddy, you hear the shotgun clicking and I'm going." Dispatcher: "Don't go outside." On the tape of the 911 call, the shotgun can be heard being cocked and Horn can be heard going outside and confronting someone. "Boom! You're dead!" he shouts. A loud bang is heard, then a shotgun being cocked and fired again, and then again. Then Horn is back on the phone: "Get the law over here quick. I've now, get, one of them's in the front yard over there, he's down, he almost run down the street. I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man, I had no choice! ... Get somebody over here quick, man." Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, are you out there right now?" Horn: "No, I am inside the house, I went back in the house. Man, they come right in my yard, I didn't know what the --- they was gonna do, I shot 'em, OK?" Dispatcher: "Did you shoot somebody? Horn: "Yes, I did, the cops are here right now." Dispatcher: "Where are you right now?" Horn: "I'm inside the house. ..." Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, put that gun down before you shoot an officer of mine. I've got several officers out there without uniforms on." Horn: "I am in the front yard right now. I am ..." Dispatcher: "Put that gun down! There's officers out there without uniforms on. Do not shoot anybody else, do you understand me? I've got police out there..." Horn: "I understand, I understand. I am out in the front yard waving my hand right now." Dispatcher: "You don't have a gun with you, do you? Horn: "No, no, no." Dispatcher: "You see a uniformed officer? Now lay down on the ground and don't do nothing else." Yelling is heard. Dispatcher: "Lay down on the ground, Mister Horn. Do what the officers tell you to do right now." Two days later, Horn released a statement through an attorney. ?The events of that day will weigh heavily on me for the rest of my life," it said. "My thoughts go out to the loved ones of the deceased.? The identities of the men killed were released Friday. They are Miguel Antonio Dejesus, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30. Official records show that each of them had a prior arrest in Harris County for drug offenses. The men were reportedly shot at a distance of less than 15 feet. A woman who lives nearby who asked not to be identified told CBS News affiliate KHOU correspondent Rucks Russell that she always saw Horn as a grandfather figure. "He is the guardian of the neighborhood," she said. "He takes care of all our kids. If we ever need anything, we call him.? But according to Tom Lambright, Horn?s attorney and a friend for more than four decades, he?s the one in need now. ?He just needs everyone to know he?s not a villain, he?s not a bad guy,? Lambright said. He went on to say that Horn voluntarily gave an extensive video statement to police immediately following the shooting. Horn was not taken into custody after the shooting. A Harris County grand jury will decide if charges are to be filed. Lambright says Horn acted in complete and total self defense and has nothing to hide. Local opinion has been passionate on both sides of the shooting. One letter to the Houston Chronicle said, "He didn't shoot them in the legs, to make sure they did not run away, or hold them at gunpoint until police arrived. No, he was judge, jury and executioner." Another letter writer praised Horn, saying, "Where does the line form to pin a medal on Joe Horn? I want to get in line." Another wrote, "Let's get rid of the police force and just hire Joe Horn!" Support for Horn was also running about 2-1 in an online survey of readers on the KHOU Web site. The incident may prove a test for a new law recently passed in Texas which expands the right of citizens to use deadly force. Under Texas law, people may use deadly force to protect their own property or to stop arson, burglary, robbery, theft or criminal mischief at night. But the legislator who authored the "castle doctrine" bill told the Chronicle it was never intended to apply to a neighbor's property, to prompt a "'Law West of the Pecos' mentality or action," said Republican Sen. Jeff Wentworth. "You're supposed to be able to defend your own home, your own family, in your house, your place of business or your motor vehicle."