Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/22/2011 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain
  2. 5 points
    TD... maybe there is proof, maybe there is hearsay.... there may well be no doubt that the likes of Saville are guilty of some abuse; however you have to balance what is fact over what is just people coming forward to give a made up account of something that never happened. Remember 9/11? Remember Tania Head? she was the woman who claimed to be a survivor of the Twin Towers collapse and then became the "leader" of the survivors group? She got there because people did not question enough before accepting what she was saying was fact.. There are people out there like the 9/11 woman, who love to say "they were there" that they too suffered... but in reality they are just attention seeking. Jimmy Saville (or whatever daft name Cleo wants to call him) is not here to defend himself against any of this and that is open season to claim to be a victim. The guy who has accused Lord McAlpine may well have been a resident in some childrens home but whether he was ever abused needs to be fully established before any names are made public otherwise the whole sorry saga will become a pointless sham with people going on Sky News to claim that some long dead celebrity abused them; just to get a few minutes of fame and to feed their sad egos.... and then of course you have the ones who will go on Sky News or Newsnight to claim that some famous person; still living, abused them and that then is a very dangerous path and will lead to peoples' lives and reputations being destroyed in an instant
  3. 4 points
    When asked the question, Are there too many immigrants in the UK? 7% said 'No' 27% said 'Yes' 66% said, 'I am not understanding question, please'
  4. 4 points
    yes........ but its Factual tripe you dont have to read it see the view counter gone as high as it can
  5. 4 points
    report it.... I couldn't live with myself if one of the residents died because I made the decision to not say anything
  6. 4 points
    Right, I've got the message too now having just given TEN - reds on this topic. So that's clearly the limit anyway. I'll report back sometime within the next 24 hours to say if/when my quota resets itself. That doesn't really explain yours though Wolfie but I'll see what I can find out although probably best that you can't give any anyway eh?
  7. 3 points
    . My first game ever was as a young lad of 10 and the game was Feathersone Rovers at home in the cup 2nd round ( February 1961) Donning my new Wires scarf and armed with a massive wooden rattle( ex Air Raid Warden's) I was ready for my indoctrination.Just as I was setting off my Dad shouted to me "Don't forget to look out for the number 2 winger Bevan he's the best player that has ever played for us" wow that was some statement and I couldn't wait to see this super hero ! Well here I was at Wilderspool and the atmosphere was electric as Wire entered the arena to the roar of a packed crowd. Then shock horror I realised Bevan wasn't playing but instead some old man who was bald with no teeth ,thin as a rake and swathed in more bandages than an Egyptian mummy was on the wing instead.! Oh well not to worry I watched the game and was still captivated for life with my beloved Wire. Even though we lost 13-10. I got home and told my Dad all about the game and how we probably got beat because Bevan never played and I then described this old man who had taken his place. Suddenly I felt a clip around my ear as Dad told me that WAS Brian Bevan !!! Happy days happy memories.
  8. 3 points
    Just about sums things up David Davis is at the golf club returning his locker key when Michel Barnier the membership secretary sees him. "Hello Mr Davis", says Mr Barnier. "I'm sorry to hear you are no longer renewing your club membership, if you would like to come to my office we can settle your account". "I have already settled my bar bill" says Mr Davis.. "Ah yes Mr Davis", says Mr Barnier, "but there are other matters that need settlement" In Mr Barnier’s office Mr Davis explains that he has settled his bar bill so wonders what else he can possibly owe the Golf Club? "Well Mr Davis" begins Mr Barnier, "you did agree to buy one of our Club Jackets". "Yes" agrees Mr Davis "I did agree to buy a jacket but I haven't received it yet". "As soon as you supply the jacket I will send you a cheque for the full amount". "That will not be possible" explains Mr Barnier. "As you are no longer a club member you will not be entitled to buy one of our jackets"! "But you still want me to pay for it" exclaims Mr Davis. "Yes" says Mr Barnier, "That will be £500 for the jacket. "There is also your bar bill". "But I've already settled my bar bill" says Mr Davis. "Yes" says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked".. "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year". "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year".. "Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis". "You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier. "Next is your restaurant bill" continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers". "Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year". "I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either" asks Mr Davis. "No, of course not" says an irritated Mr Barnier, "you are no longer a club member!" "Then of course" Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof". "Clubhouse roof" exclaims Mr Davis, "What's that got to do with me?" "Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week", your share of the bill is £2000". "I see" says Mr Davis, "anything else?". "Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension". "We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month". "He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it". "This brings your total bill to £10,000" says Mr Barnier. "Let me get this straight" says Mr Davis, "you want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not being served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!" "Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable" says Mr Barnier. Now we understand what Brexit is all about.
  9. 3 points
    Sorry Geoff, I don't agree with you on this. The 'City for Peace' concept didn't work and I don't think a bid for 'City of Culture' will benefit from us being portrayed as a town in constant mourning. The bombing happened 20 years ago, isn't it time to move on? Other towns have been bombed or had terrible tragedy but they haven't made it a trademark. Manchester has recently had one of the biggest tragedies ever in the UK but they straight away organised another concert to restore confidence. Warrington's yearly bridge street vigils achieve nothing but to make people re-live the terror of that day and with what's going on in the world at present can only be a reminder as to how vulnerable we are. I feel sorry for the Parry's as everyone else in the town who remembers must, (as if we'll ever be able to forget), but the children of today need to be able to live unfettered from past misery and be allowed to grow up in an optimistic, joyful, forward-thinking atmosphere. Can we not just dump the doom & gloom and go for 'Opportunity and Optimism'? be a town where there are opportunities for all, (young & old & socially inclusive) where talent is nurtured and where life can be lived fully & joyfully. We already have good educational standards, integrated communities, the disability awareness project and recently the wonderful and much needed disability inclusive playground, etc. So why don't we just build on the positives we have? We need to increase and improve arts provision, (re-open the old art college?) build a theatre, increase and enhance our open spaces, provide good hospital & healthcare facilities and upgrade the transport system. (loads more to add to that list but it'll do for a start ) Instead of 'Warrington a Town Pledged to Peace' couldn't we be 'Warrington - Where Everyone's a Winner!'
  10. 3 points
    I agree Dizzy, Perth looks lovely, and makes me want to go there too! But, do any of you honestly believe that this competition really has anything at all to do with culture? In these days of 'fake austerity' it seems to me like nothing more than an excuse for pouring public money into developer's pockets. Check out how much previous contestants have spent on building 'cultural' venues in order to be a 'contestant', then check how many of these venues have become money draining white elephants only to lie empty or be converted to cheap offices etc. WBC has for years allowed its built heritage to be destroyed, have employed a 'regeneration officer' infamously renown for destroying precious roman heritage in Chester and wouldn't know what 'culture' was if it smacked them in the face. They have embarked upon a town centre regeneration programme that CABE actively criticized and refused to support, whilst the beautiful Victorian Bridge St which could have been the town's best tourist attraction has been left to rot. They have allowed a town centre nightlife of drugs, drink and violence to flourish, have allowed the ancient home of the first Lord of Warrington to be converted into yuppie apartments and but for mass public outrage would have sold off Walton Hall and Gardens to become a 'boutique hotel'. etc. etc. etc. Notably, they were recently voted worst in the country for culture. Yet despite all this I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were well placed in, or even won, this farce of a competition, because I think the real criteria is how much profit the contestants can generate for the developer friends of this greedy, materialistic government.
  11. 3 points
    So the EU are demanding we pay them billions to get out. They are demanding that all agreements are done BEFORE we start trade talks too and also want the rights of EU citizens living here to be all agreed and rubber stamped ..... and yet when we throw an ace into the ring, namely the fact that the EU rely very heavily on our security services and expertise, they cry in unison that that shouldn't be allowed??? Of course it should. Our security services are paid for by OUR taxes and is bugger all to do with the EU. If they want our info to keep them safe then they should bloody well pay for it and make concessions to keep that info flowing. If you negotiate, you negotiate with everything you've got. You don't agree to the other parties terms ad infinitum and then accept a few crumbs back.
  12. 3 points
    You're right, very often on this forum .
  13. 3 points
    Well, there was an interesting prog on TV about the Falklands War; and it seems it was a close run thing, a lot closer than we realised at the time. The only way to protect overseas interests, is to retain the ability to project air & sea power to the point of conflict, so making our servicemen redundant and not having a carrier, would seem rather irresponsible in respect of a rematch with the Argies. As for Maggie, as much as I may despise her; she was decisive (unlike most politicians), a trait required at the time of the War; and unlike Bliar Wars, a defence of British territory, not an invasion of others.
  14. 3 points
    Peter, I agree with you that reducing police numbers will certainly not help the problem but disagree that "following the HR issue to the letter".is making matters worse. You seem to have an aversion to Human Rights legislation but have you ever actually studied the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights? If you had you would have realised that the problems lie with either misinterpretation of the legislation or,as seems most often with regard to convicted prisoners, failure to correctly comply. One of the most basic rules is that you cannot grant human rights if in doing so it infringes the human rights of others. The rights of victims to crime have long been ignored, take for example the early release of perpetrators of violent attacks or indeed puedophiles who have, once released, attacked again. Here clearly the victim's "right to life" etc have been denied. If the police and other bodies were to address 'human rights' from the victim's point of view then the criminals wouldn't have so light a time of it - so why don't they? I seriously wonder whether it is mainly down to matters of finance. Also Peter, as for being "soft on crime" - I don't rate the present judicial system as being particularly 'just' in that some types of crime invoke penalties which seem far in excess for the actual crime whilst for some types of crime and some types of criminals there seems a reluctance to even investigate let alone prosecute and if - by force of public outcry - these elitist type of criminals ever get prosecuted then their sentencing is often the minimal possible - if anything. Does anyone seriously believe that Jimmy Savile could possibly have been able to carry out these terrible crimes over all those years without anyone knowing what was going on? Would anyone who did know be charged?
  15. 3 points
    And el moderators seem quite happy to allow him to peddal BNP agenda in the form of an obviously fake photo while at the same time repeatedly deleting the real photo I have posted here. Mmmmm.... Makes you wonder?
  16. 3 points
    Nope, if kids are out of control in the first place, behaviour patterns will have been established, regardless of legal liability.
  17. 3 points
    Went for a nice walk earlier with my samurai sword and a nice copper helped me across the road because he thought I was blind! How strange!!
  18. 3 points
    no sooner said than done one red on your post and worked fine one green on your post and the same. I put a red on your last post an got a -1 on it then a green on the post previous. the green still shows and the red has been cancelled out.
  19. 3 points
    That's a shame but crikey Wolfie you must have given a lot of red -'s in your time if you have somehow exceeded your quota. No idea what the quota is but maybe Gary can tell so we can laugh at you. I think there maybe a daily quota but you said you've not been able to do it for a year and that's not right surely. I think you may have a problem (with your username account I mean honest ) You're still top dog though
  20. 3 points
    See people still not changed on here still from the Hillsborough topic still have to have their childish little digs thought I would come back to give it a go but not for me Gary shame toting up as well 13 years been a pain in your side ...lol no wounder you have gone white well end of the day now mate
  21. 3 points
    ...and I would have got away with it too if it hadn't been for those pesky kids!!!
  22. 3 points
    Rod. You're being disingenuous because I've read the reports including the conclusions from the council that the benefits you seem so certain of are in fact far from certain. The pilots did not reduce casualties. They did reduce speeds but they were beginning to go back up. They did divert large numbers of vehicles onto other roads. The police did express concerns about enforcement and drivers acting aggressively when faced with what they considered inappropriate speeds. I also know that the DFT believes that reducing speeds will increase pollution and that the 20mph limit does not reduce speeds in and of itself. It needs to be enforced with other measures. So no changes to casualties in the Warrington pilots. No significant reduction in speed. Increased pollution. The creation of rat runs. All of the things, in fact, that have been reported from other councils. To be honest I wish you would now give up on making these claims and admit that this is solely about social engineering. I may even agree with you to some degree on that because I actually have more experience than you of living in a city with a fully integrated system of bike lanes, roads and public transport. I studied at University in Muenster in North Germany for two years where they have an incredible network that fully integrates all modes of transport. It was great but wouldn't be achievable in Warrington without flattening the place first and starting from scratch. It is my opinion that your campaign group has helped to cost this town hundreds of thousands of pounds it can ill afford on a scheme with no clear objectives and - at best - extremely questionable grounds for implementation. Based on the results of the council's own pilots, the only reason for this going ahead seems to be a dogma. The last thing we need is to reverse the decision now because that would just further deplete resources, but you have essentially diverted time and money away from more important and meaningful issues.
  23. 3 points
    The Government should not have allowed itself to be brow-beaten by a baying mob. Greggs and other similar firms have been exploiting a loophole for years and all the changes would have done was seal the loophole. Lots of other shops, who buy in their pasties and pies and then have to charge VAT because they heat them up were, and now, still are, at a disadvantage. Don't see why anyone should be confused. The situation remains as it was before. Hot takeaway food carries VAT, cold takeaway food doesn't. But if the food just happens to still be hot (because it has just come from the oven) then it is classed as cold takeaway food so is not subject to VAT. Incidentally, I can't be sure of this, but I suspect VAT on hot takeaway food was first brought in by a Labour Government. Even if I am wrong, the last Labour Government did not remove it so it is somewhat hypocritical of them to be braying about it now. It is also a load of rubbish to suggest the change would have hit the needy poor. If folk are that poor, they shouldn't be buying takeaway food at all but should be saving money by preparing their own food at home. Er...sorry, I forgot...most of them don't know how to these days.
  24. 2 points
    Made it into the pages of Private Eye this week, but full coverage still missing from the pages of Pravda the Guardian. As ever, local Labour councillors are being given an easy ride by the local media, even when one of them who also functions as the PCC for £72,000 a year but won't commit to it full time has to move his office away from Police HQ and appoint a family friend for £50,000 to help him maximise his income for as little work as possible. If that ain't a front page news story, then I don't work in publishing myself. All three Warrington councillors should be suspended and the appointment investigated. What Salford do with the DPCC is up to them, but they may be glad to see her turn up for once if they do decide to ask her what she's playing at.
  25. 2 points
    When you bring beer into the current concerns about what is in food then things have come full circle, Greenall's Bitter used to be called horse piss fifty years ago.
×