goldfinger
- 09 Jun 2005 12:25
Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).
Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.
cheers GF.
This_is_me
- 12 Aug 2009 15:43
- 7747 of 81564
How about grouse on 12th Aug on a Scottish moor being shot down by the Tory gentry?
greekman
- 13 Aug 2009 08:22
- 7749 of 81564
I have a warm feeling in my heart this morning, hearing that we are to release the Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi.
He is being released on compassionate grounds because he is suffering terminal cancer. The release is so he can spend the rest of his days with his family in Libya.
It obviously matters not that he was responsible for the deaths of 270 people, men women and children, presumably without an iota of compassion himself.
In the future when mass killings are carried out and our government states that the perpetrators if caught will never see freedom, how can we believe it.
And this is only a couple of days after the Ronnie Biggs news, he who mocked so called British justice by wearing a Policeman's helmet at a birthday party, and the news that the killers of baby P will be given new identities and full police protection, (they would not need this if they served life, meaning LIFE in prison).
Thank goodness this Labour government has got tough on crime, although I doubt if any if the other parties would alter much.
No wonder we are looked at as a soft target for crime and terrorism.
This_is_me
- 14 Aug 2009 07:43
- 7750 of 81564
There wouldn't have been that problem if we had been as compassionate to him as he was to the people on the aeroplane i.e. hung him.
greekman
- 14 Aug 2009 09:10
- 7752 of 81564
Totally agree. Even if he was joking (which I don't think he was) it would just go to show how much our MP's hold us in contempt.
Also on the news this am
Sir Patrick Cormack has complained that his 64,000 salary was not enough to allow him to make donations to charity.
'One is expected to give liberally to all manner of charities, one is expected to attend all manner of events, one is expected constantly to be putting one's hand into one's pocket,' he added (a bit like us tax payers).
High-profile MP Nadine Dorries made things worse by blaming the media rather than politicians for the expenses scandal. She also claimed she recently assisted at a road accident but was too frightened to admit her identity as an MP, such was the publics anger. Poor lamb.
A Conservative MP has survived an attempt to deselect her following her involvement in the parliamentary expenses row.
Anne Main, the MP for St Albans, had allowed her daughter to live rent-free at a taxpayer-funded flat she claimed was her second home for the purposes of expenses.
No doubt she will be elected as it will be a case of which fiddling b*****d do we vote for. Pathetic.
ExecLine
- 14 Aug 2009 09:20
- 7753 of 81564
Kayak
- 14 Aug 2009 12:25
- 7754 of 81564
That Nadine Dorries scene in my head just won't go away. "Let me through, let me through, I'm a Member of Parliament."
Just what you need when you're about to draw your last breath. Not sure why she thought it was relevant for anyone to know?
greekman
- 14 Aug 2009 12:57
- 7755 of 81564
Thats what I though, who would she tell and why.
But then I thought, what if someone at the scene had required mouth to mouth. Who better than a so full of hot air (wind) MP.
This_is_me
- 14 Aug 2009 13:50
- 7756 of 81564
MPs don't fill in their expenses claims any differently than a lot of people!
skinny
- 14 Aug 2009 15:02
- 7757 of 81564
I just had to move my daughter's car - clio with NO power steering - what a struggle - I felt like I needed oxygen after grappling with it.
greekman
- 14 Aug 2009 15:08
- 7758 of 81564
But there are a several differences.
1 They can claim quite substantial amounts without completing/producing receipts to prove the amounts spent.
2 When/if they are caught, which is far less likely as proven by the period and extent it has been occurring, often nothing happens even if it is criminal (see No 3).
3 Until the 21/07/09 Parliament -- the House of Commons set their own rules, IE they were, and to a large extent still remain a law unto themselves.
4 The Department of Resources (auditors) in the MPs case knew that fiddling was going on but allowed it to continue, something that would be very unlikely in the private employment sector.
5 As they represent us the Tax Payer, who pay their salaries (and none tax payers) it is our money that pays their expenses, and yet we have no power in their instant removal.
6 We have no choice to be a customer of HM Government/Opposition, whereas we have a choice as to be a customer of a company or not.
I have had a T shirt printed which states....UK MPS are Institutionally Morally Corrupt. Democracy is Dead.
I wear this with every time I go to my nearest town Beverley, which is where our local MPS and Councillors (who are about as dishonest) stand and preach their sermons every other week-end. Since the expenses scandal they are hardly ever seen.
This_is_me
- 15 Aug 2009 00:39
- 7759 of 81564
No wonder you call yourself 'skinny'! I thought all modern cars had power stearing. Have you checked if it has a broken power stearing?
This_is_me
- 15 Aug 2009 00:46
- 7760 of 81564
Let's all vote for greekman at the next election on the no expenses ticket!
greekman
- 16 Aug 2009 12:37
- 7761 of 81564
This-is-me.
Thanks for that. I am at present asking for donations to my becoming an MP fighting fund.
Cheques to be made out to Theo Paradopistricadiousikis, sent C/O Muchfailski General Bank, 1 Muchogracious Street, Helsinki.
All monies will then be transfered into my Bermudan bank account (too complicated to explain here, but it is nothing to do with money laundering, it's to save on money transfer rates), from where I will run my election campaign, solely due of course to the savings on my expenses (less tax).
Also to save on my expenses, no receipts will be issued, re any donations, but you can trust me, as 'I'm a pretty straight sort of guy' with apologise to Tony 'teflon' Blair.
This_is_me
- 17 Aug 2009 11:27
- 7762 of 81564
I am sorry to have to be the one to tell you greek but there has just been a new EU regulation issued that any MP or MEP not claiming at least 1,000,000 in expenses per year will be disqualified and thrown on the dole since anyone not needing that kind of expenses is obviously not doing any work. Since you state that you will not need any expenses that means, according to the new regulation, that you are in effect saying that you will not do any work and are therefore disbared from standing for any elected position in the EU.
If you want to claim 1.000,000 in expenses let me know. You can pay me the 1,000,000 a year as your assistant and your problem will be solved.
ExecLine
- 17 Aug 2009 14:24
- 7763 of 81564
Obama's ambassadors continue to refuse to pay 3.5m congestion charge bill
In total, embassies owe more 28 million in fines on top of unpaid congestion charges. Americas fines are the highest, with Russia owing 2.6 million and Japan 2.3 million.
A TfL spokesman said: More than three-quarters of all embassies pay the congestion charge. It is therefore disappointing that the American embassy continues to refuse to pay. TfL and the UK Government are agreed that the
congestion charge is a charge for a service and not a tax which means that diplomats are not exempt from payment. All staff at the American Embassy should pay it, in the same way as British officials pay road tolls in the United States. TfL continues to engage directly with those embassies that refuse to pay in order to increase compliance with the scheme by diplomats.
The non-paying embassies are saying that is a tax and not a charge for a service, and therefore that is why they should be exempt from having to pay it.
Meanwhile Boris continues with his holiday....
greekman
- 17 Aug 2009 15:03
- 7764 of 81564
ExecLine,
Another example to the world that shows yet again what a soft touch we are. But of course we Brits must obey the rules whilst everyone else ignores them.
Johnny foreigner must be laughing their socks off.
This-is-me,
OK as a good British citizen I must obey the rules, so I will claim the required amount (reluctantly and under the strongest protest of course).
ExecLine
- 20 Aug 2009 14:03
- 7765 of 81564
It's exam time....
Just a couple of comments from my local paper:
I am an employer who constantly see job applications from these so-called "star pupils' - most of whom are not even capable of stringing together enough words or English grammar to present themselves properly - either orally or in prose. This is nothing to do with "dumbing-down" the examinations per se. It is about what is acceptable in the schools, and it seems that most schools (and parents) find in perfectly acceptable that A-Level students can't even spell properly, let alone carry on an intelligent conversation. There is a very good reason why we have accepted norms of spelling and grammar - it is so we know what each other is talking about.
.................
I wonder how many people, particularly like the above poster, know that the procedure forced on teachers now is that they are NOT allowed - yes, thats right, not allowed, to correct spelling mistakes and grammar errors in a pupil's work.
Its no good making out that kids these days are thick because they havent put the work in. How do they know they've done something wrong if they are simply just never told about it?
When my children have homework, they always do it in rough and I correct it for them. However a large number of parents do not have the knowledge to be able to do this, which means poor English is now being passed down through the generations.
Unless this stupid Government directive is stopped, things will only get worse. Especially when you get people complaining about kids' grammar and spelling, who dont and can't even check that belonging to their own!
Seymour Clearly
- 20 Aug 2009 14:35
- 7766 of 81564
Find my 16 year old son correcting my grammar these days. Also he can hold a conversation with my mother about historical fact that I haven't a clue about or can't really remember. Makes me proud and frustrated in the same measure!