Linux Format forums

Re: HAPPY CHRISSY TO ALL

jjmac — Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:58 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:58 pm

Oh, i'm quite sure it is a disguise (grin)
The furry thing hmmmmm, yum yum, dinner (grin)

jm

Re: HAPPY CHRISSY TO ALL

catgate — Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:13 pm

Author: catgate

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:13 pm

jjmac wrote:

He dosen't look very middle eastern to me ?

Spot on jjmac.
However it's a disguise. You will find that the furry thing is an explosive device, and "stick" thing in his other hand is the barrel of a Kalashnikov.

Re: HAPPY CHRISSY TO ALL

jjmac — Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:30 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:30 pm

He dosen't look very middle eastern to me ?

Re: HAPPY CHRISSY TO ALL

TheDoctor — Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:32 pm

Author: TheDoctor

Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:32 pm

www.bnp.org.uk wrote:

Wishing everybody a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Isn't this an Easter picture? Typical fascist confusion.

Re: HAPPY CHRISSY TO ALL

www.bnp.org.uk — Mon Dec 25, 2006 5:27 pm

Author: www.bnp.org.uk

Posted: Mon Dec 25, 2006 5:27 pm

Wishing everybody a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

jjmac — Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:38 am

Author: jjmac

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:38 am

It is a hard call. I tend to go for decentralisation. When ever there are major sports events in cenntral Sydney it makes life a total pain for people that live in the inner city. But with out the facilities there isn't much point to decentralising the venue. By decentralising i mean out of the city of course. But then, if it is something i'm interested in i don't want to traps 50 k or so to go and see it. Only because i know the trains are hopeless. A hard one to fix

jm

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

nordle — Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:31 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:31 pm

jjmac wrote:

hmmm, some very good points, after all ... who needs tourists any way, make em travel (grin).

lol

Although to be fair, wembley is likely to be mostly used by _natives_, if it ever gets finished of course. So a location which has good network links and close to a high population density that will use it would be good, midlands (Birmingham) would probably have been a good location. Birmingham has good rail links, NEC, indoor arena, a mid sized airport etc

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

jjmac — Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:36 am

Author: jjmac

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:36 am

hmmm, some very good points, after all ... who needs tourists any way, make em travel (grin).

But it doesen't really have much to do with the autrageous price of crack, and what possible role rehab has to do with it, as suggested earlier.

Happy Xmas All

(wink.png)

jm

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

towy71 — Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:55 pm

Author: towy71

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:55 pm

I would suggest that the Dome, Wembley the Olympics and just about anything else shows how London centric both Tories and Labour have been and are. In a sensible world the national stadium for football would be somewhere in the Midlands and as mentioned the dome should have similarly been in Brum or some such.
I have a plan that all politicians should have to live in sackcloth and ashes, London be allowed to sink into the Thames and Scotland always win every world cup

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

wyliecoyoteuk — Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:37 pm

Author: wyliecoyoteuk

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:37 pm

I'm not bashing the South generally, mainly the attitude of idiots like Brian Sewell who think that the world ends at Watford.
Plus I have lived ( and have family in) in many places in England, France and Belgium.
I don't Like London, despite having spent far more time there than I wanted to.
I actually quite like Birmingham,and I get tired of the southern idiots who see it as a target of ridicule, and the corrupt politics that denies it a fair chance.

For example, they had a "competition" to see who would host the country's millenium expo. Birmingham won, so they changed the rules, so that London would win, and we got the fiasco of the dome.

The south is important to the country because it makes sure that no-one else gets the opportunity, even though, in this modern world, centralisation is less and less desirable, necessary or even sustainable without large amounts of wasted money..

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

catgate — Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:07 pm

Author: catgate

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:07 pm

It is rather sad that this country is run by politicians. Unfortunately it has become the norm to use the the word "politics" as though it were some form of honest endevour, whereas in actual fact, the meaning is entirely the opposite (see Roget's Thesaurus), and, in the way that it is presented in this country, it is a form of deceptive, self seeking, carpet bagging, egocenticism, that those who practise it call democracy.
It is the other side of the coin to religion, which is based on the same premise.
That of persuading the punter that "Only I have the key to understanding, knowledge and truth and you must therefore do as I say. I also know, because of my understanding and connection to the truth, that, unless you do as I tell you to do, you will surely perish. Either in Hell's fire or at the hands of other undesirable devils, like Osama bin Laden, or the Home Secretary"
This is then followed by either taxes (or tithes) or a collection plate. Followed by a new frock and fancy hat for the Archbishop, or a new pension scheme for the MPs.

edit:-

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

nordle — Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:06 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:06 pm

Yes I've over simplified, of course there are many many factors, but if you are recieving only 1/3 or less than other authorities, it doesn't increase your chances of supplying better services.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

Rhakios — Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:16 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:16 pm

I can only assume you were in the Birmingham area before they deregulated the bus service, after which the WMPT buses became an absurd farce in the area I was living in when it happened.
Council tax bills are high in Walsall, certainly a lot higher than where my parents live in the Lichfield area. As for the council in general, they make Birmingham look competent.
The local health service is mostly saved by having some very good individuals working for it.

I'm not sure that simply having a labour majority council is the answer to everything, it doesn't work for me in Walsall.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

nordle — Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:27 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:27 pm

wylie, whats with the south bashing? I've lived in chichester, guildford, birmingham and spent a lot of time in fife. But the place I found with the most bizarre attitude to southerners was leeds, or anywhere in Yorkshire really.

Always rambling on about them being a bunch of wet fish, afraid of hard graft, born with silver spoon, better health care, better schools, better transport, better everything.

I can safely say its not true, brum had one of the best public transport systems and left me with a lot more "spare" cash because living costs were so much cheaper. Again the schools had fewer pupils per class and hospitals stayed open.

Chichester and Guildford, different story, large council tax bills, hugely expensive public transport which really doesn't run that often when you venture even slightly out of the towns. Local hospitals, A & E departments, mental institutions, rehab clinics (mobility), no local police stations, no dentists, long waiting times, closing establishments all over the shop because of poor funding.

What is amazing is the size of the establishments that are closing. I know a few people who would not be alive today without the large A & E dept at the Royal Surrey, I know several people who have been treated with various forms of cancer. The numbers are staggering, the've treated something like 2m cancer patients in the last 10 years.
If the plans go ahead it means a catchment area increasing from 25miles to 60miles. How is that going to save lives?

The main problem is very simply its a blue area on the whole, labour have very few options to make inroads into the voting behaviour.
When taxes are collected they are punted into central gov coffers and councils recieve money back in the form of grants and credits. Essentially this means, if you live in a true blue area and labour are in power, dont expect your public services to improve any time soon. They know that they won't win votes, and votes are all that matters, so the redistribution of taxes is heavily weighted in labour areas favour.

As an example, the councils only get to keep 30% of what is collected, 70% gets redistributed across labour seats to secure the votes as people see real public investment and change. I know this because I designed the system that one authority uses to get a base estimate put together for 4 year projections.

The irony being, if local people swallowed their pride and voted labour on the next election, they would probably see a lot of increased investment in the initial years to retain the seat.

Like anywhere the south has good/bad points and people.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Infinity

Rhakios — Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:01 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:01 pm

towy71 wrote:

we're all doomed

I always wondered what happened to Frazer when Dad's Army finished. Now I know!