In article , PoP
URL:mailto

Well put. I'll be surprised if we don't end up with a civil uprising
like the poll tax if this continues. Mr Stupid who lives up Public
Avenue will one day wake up and smell the coffee. I hope so anyway.

I think you will find that the Apathy Society got disbanded due to lack of
interest. :-)

I can't understand why people put up with all this. I am going to be on the
first boat out as soon as I can retire. I'm going to hide in a sparsely
populated area of the continent where I can forget about about the horrors
of Phony Bliar and co.

--
AJL Electronics (G6FGO) Ltd : Satellite and TV aerial systems
http://www.classicmicrocars.co.uk : http://www.ajlelectronics.co.uk

In article ,
PoP wrote:
True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through her
teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

Whether the Belgrano sinking was right or wrong, it took place at a
time when war had been announced between two nations.

So how does this affect Thatcher lying? Many would have been quite happy
if she'd just said "It's a war - **** happens".

War was never announced for Iraq (AFAIK), and I never saw the
justification for sending our troops into harms way without being
properly equipped.

I'd certainly second that - properly equipped or not. But I wonder if the
population as a whole would agree?

FWIW, wasn't there a desperate problem with footware and rifles in the
Falklands war?

--
*Why are a wise man and a wise guy opposites?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

John Rumm wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Parish wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Make sure of course that when the real issue is about whether or not
you had sex with a dossier, the enquiry is defined as whether the
dossier became pregnant with your child, which since you just wanked
over it, is a sure fire bet.


ROFLMAO.

So if Sarah Keays had just given Cecil Parkinson a hand-job he
wouldn't have had to resign?



Probably not.
No DNA evidence in those days.


See there is a DIY link in there.... Cecil demonstrated how government
is like flat pack furniture, vis: as a result of one mis-placed screw
the whole cabinet falls apart!


Whereas the hutton reports continues the theme, showing how a bit of
bent fixing and a coat of whitewash, will keep it together long past its
sell by date?

geoff wrote:

In message , John Rumm
writes

Jerry. wrote:

Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....


All the wrong ones I bet ;-((

What do you expect with Hutton's track record

Hopefully, it will backfire viciously

My prayer...

geoff wrote:

In message 0, mike
ring writes

"Martin" wrote in
:



Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....


Nah, looks more like another Whitewash job

I didn't realise Lord H was Scotch till I heard his speech; so I guess
it's
the Scotch Mafia closing ranks again


If anyone's interested ...

"The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North Ireland,
is a classic representative of the British ruling establishment. A
member of the Anglo-Irish elite, he was educated at Shewsbury all boys
boarding school, and then Balliol, Oxford, before entering the exclusive
club of the British Judiciary. Whilst British Judges are overwhelmingly
conservative, upper class, white, male and biased, Hutton's background
is even more compromised.

His name will be familiar to residents of the Six counties of Ulster.
During the bloody thrity years war Hutton was an instrument of British
state repression, starting in the late 1960's as junior counsel to the
Northern Ireland attorney general, and by 1988 rising to the top job of
Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland.

Hutton spent his career as Judge and Jury in the notorious northern
Ireland kangaroo 'Diplock Courts'. These were special non-Jury courts,
condemned by human rights advocates for their miscarriages of justice.
He was hated for this role by the families of the many innocent
catholics wrongly convicted here.

Hutton distinguished himself after the Bloody Sunday massacre of civil
rights protesters in 1972. He played a key role in the ensuing judicial
cover-up called the Widgery Inquiry which absolved British troops of
Murder. This miscarriage of justice is only now being investigated by
the current Saville inquiry.

Then in 1978 he represnted the British Government before the European
Court of Human Rights, defending it against a ruling that it abused and
maltreated detainees from the conflict.

However, he will be remembered in the rest of the UK for his role in the
1999 Pinochet affair. Another senior Judge, Lord Hoffman had contributed
to the decision to arrest and extradite the notorious former dicator of
Chile and mass murderer General Pinochet during his visit to Britain.

As a law lord, Hutton led the rightwing attack on Lord Hoffman, on the
excuse that Hoffman's links to the human rights group amnesty
international invalidated Pinochets arrest! Lord Hutton said "public
confidence in the integrity of the administration of justice would be
shaken" if Lord Hoffman's ruling was not overturned.

More recently, Hutton was also involved in the ruling that David
Shayler, the former MI5 agent, could not argue he was acting in the
public interest by revealing secrets.

This history of intimate links with, and knowledge of Britains secret
military intelligence operations meant he could be a trusted pair of
hands when it came to the Kelly affair. "


Thank geoof, I knew it was bad, but not that bad...

PoP wrote:

Whether the Belgrano sinking was right or wrong, it took place at a
time when war had been announced between two nations.

IIRC war was never declared over the Falklands - hence why it was always
the Falklands "conflict" and we never struck directly at air bases etc
on Argentine soil.

Having said that I am not too bothered about the Belgrano - sail a
military ship in and out of an exclusion zone during a conflict and you
have to be asking for trouble.

(Trivia for those that have not heard it befo The General Belgrano
was bought by Argentina from the US. It used to be called the USS
Phoenix, and as such was famous for being one of the few ships in Pearl
Harbour to survive the attack in 1941 - guess its luck had to run out
one day!)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

PoP wrote:

I can safely report that the guy is a midget - I'd guess about 5ft
6in, possibly less. Just shows how TV can give you the wrong
impression!

Like the classic line:

"What do you mean I looked fat? you know a TV camera adds half a stone
at least!"

"Well just how many cameras are there on you?"



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)" wrote in message
...
snip

I can't understand why people put up with all this. I am going to be on
the
first boat out as soon as I can retire. I'm going to hide in a sparsely
populated area of the continent where I can forget about about the horrors
of Phony Bliar and co.


Trouble is, you'll probably end up with the Bliar's as your neighbour !..

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:14:41 +0000, "Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)"
wrote:

In article , PoP
URL:mailto

Well put. I'll be surprised if we don't end up with a civil uprising
like the poll tax if this continues. Mr Stupid who lives up Public
Avenue will one day wake up and smell the coffee. I hope so anyway.

I think you will find that the Apathy Society got disbanded due to lack of
interest. :-)

Oh no. I'm a militant member.......


I can't understand why people put up with all this. I am going to be on the
first boat out as soon as I can retire. I'm going to hide in a sparsely
populated area of the continent where I can forget about about the horrors
of Phony Bliar and co.

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:45:14 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

IIRC war was never declared over the Falklands - hence why it was always
the Falklands "conflict" and we never struck directly at air bases etc
on Argentine soil.

You may be right.

Having said that I am not too bothered about the Belgrano - sail a
military ship in and out of an exclusion zone during a conflict and you
have to be asking for trouble.

Spot on. During my HP career I visited Northwood one time, and was
taken into the depths of the place - it's like a tower block built
upside down, you go in at the top and proceed downwards. It's where
the UK navy is controlled from (AIUI). Able to withstand anything but
a direct nuclear hit.

Anyway, I digress. The story I'm familiar with is that Belgrano had
presented a bit of a problem by sailing close to the exclusion zone
and was being tracked by submarine HMS Conqueror. Conqueror reported
back to Northwood, signal immediately escalated to 10 Downing Street
and the order was taken at Prime Minister level to take the ship out.
Although the turnaround time was relatively short in this message
sequence it appears that Belgrano had turned around away from the
conflict zone and was heading towards safety.

I understand the purpose of engaging Belgrano like this was to show
the argies that the UK meant business. Remember that after Belgrano
went down no other argie ships came out of port.

PoP

Sending email to my published email address isn't
guaranteed to reach me.

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:29:10 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Oh no. I'm a militant member.......

......of the Tooting Popular Front?

Sorry, couldn't resist

PoP

Sending email to my published email address isn't
guaranteed to reach me.

In article ,
PoP wrote:
I understand the purpose of engaging Belgrano like this was to show
the argies that the UK meant business. Remember that after Belgrano
went down no other argie ships came out of port.

Makes absolutely no difference to the fact that Thatcher lied about it.
Same as Blair lying about those 'weapons of mass distruction'. They'd both
have earned more respect by simply telling the truth - that they were said
or done for propaganda reasons.

--
*Some days you're the dog, some days the hydrant.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Martin wrote:
"Jerry." wrote in message
...

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...
Grand Designs tonight is about a couple who build a Huf Haus.

Ch4, 9pm.



Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....



Nah, looks more like another Whitewash job

Yes! our wonderful Tone lives to fight another day... death to all Tories

geoff wrote:
In message 0, mike
ring writes
"Martin" wrote in
:



Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....


Nah, looks more like another Whitewash job

I didn't realise Lord H was Scotch till I heard his speech; so I
guess it's the Scotch Mafia closing ranks again


If anyone's interested ...

"The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North
Ireland,
[snip]
So one of the good guys who knows his way around the system then?
So a few Irish terrorists got a bit of rough justice.... serve 'em right.

Grunff wrote:
Andy Hall wrote:

Dirt as well as blood on their hands........

Is it just me or did the country enter a bizzare twilight-zone like
reality sometime during the past 2-3 years? So little seems to make
sense any more.

No, we got rid of the corrupt Tories and now you can think for yourself but
have lost the ability to do so..

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
It's one thing being an MP and being caught with fingers in the till
or wearing underwear generally suited to the opposite sex and having
to resign, but at some point in the last few years a whole new level
of dishonesty with denial has come into being, one which is quite
unpleasant.

True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

I hated Thatcher but that sinking was correct.. alls fair in war.
Why would she have to explain it? we were at war, it was a warship so we
sank it... whats the problem?

geoff wrote:
In message , Dave Plowman
writes
In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
It's one thing being an MP and being caught with fingers in the till
or wearing underwear generally suited to the opposite sex and having
to resign, but at some point in the last few years a whole new level
of dishonesty with denial has come into being, one which is quite
unpleasant.

True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

Yup, Blair's doing a Thatcher, it's just that she held out longer

Not long to go though....

PoP wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

Whether the Belgrano sinking was right or wrong, it took place at a
time when war had been announced between two nations.

War was never announced for Iraq (AFAIK), and I never saw the
justification for sending our troops into harms way without being properly
equipped.
Soldiers got killed in a war zone.... so what?
Yes there may have been a logistics problem, wars have been lost on such
issues but these are not normal business supply situations...

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
PoP wrote:
I understand the purpose of engaging Belgrano like this was to show
the argies that the UK meant business. Remember that after Belgrano
went down no other argie ships came out of port.

Makes absolutely no difference to the fact that Thatcher lied about
it. Same as Blair lying about those 'weapons of mass distruction'.
They'd both have earned more respect by simply telling the truth -
that they were said or done for propaganda reasons.

What a load of crap. Propaganda is a cheap war weapon so we should make full
use of it....
The 3rd rate nations milk it for all its worth, why shouldn't we?

PoP wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:29:10 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Oh no. I'm a militant member.......

.....of the Tooting Popular Front?

Nah, they don't pay Council Tax in Tooting, they're all on benefit...
New name for the area is "Twixt the Prisions"

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Clive Summerfield wrote:
Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....

Pity it's the wrong ones......

Seemed like the sadly inevitable conclusion from the day the inquiry
was announced.

But all these sort of enquiries find the government of the day
blameless. Profumo, anyone?

Reminds me of the hot cock from the cabinet jokes....

Parish wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Make sure of course that when the real issue is about whether or not
you had sex with a dossier, the enquiry is defined as whether the
dossier became pregnant with your child, which since you just wanked
over it, is a sure fire bet.


ROFLMAO.

So if Sarah Keays had just given Cecil Parkinson a hand-job he
wouldn't have had to resign?

Shows the difference between us and the US where Clinton was admired for his
virility in shagging loads of women. Whereas her we'd prefer weak nancy
boys.

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

It will be interesting to read how much more comes out in 30 years
time.....

Indeed. But if I'm still here I shan't remember what it was all about
... :-)

Mary
Or care, because its all a storm in teacup.
I can't believe all the ******** thats been spouted about this issue
recently... it isn't even August.

PoP wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:28:10 +0000, Parish wrote:

Don't be so sure. I'm 46 and for the last couple of years there's
been things released under the 30-year rule that I've thought, "Hey,
I remember that" (of course I've now forgotten what they were ;-) )

Less than 10 years to go for The Falklands conflict. I was looking
after Portsmouth Dockyard for HP when that took place so have a vested
interest to find out more.....
Is that HP as in Hewlett Packard or brown sauce?

"Martin" wrote in message
...

"Jerry." wrote in message
...

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...
Grand Designs tonight is about a couple who build a Huf Haus.

Ch4, 9pm.

Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....

Nah, looks more like another Whitewash job

He got it right.

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:20:35 -0000, "BillR"
wrote:

geoff wrote:
In message , Dave Plowman
writes
In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
It's one thing being an MP and being caught with fingers in the till
or wearing underwear generally suited to the opposite sex and having
to resign, but at some point in the last few years a whole new level
of dishonesty with denial has come into being, one which is quite
unpleasant.

True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

Yup, Blair's doing a Thatcher, it's just that she held out longer

Not long to go though....

Yep. Even Teflon peels off eventually.
..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:21:17 GMT, "Clive Summerfield"
wrote:


"No-one" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:13:48 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:52:16 -0000, "Jerry."
wrote:


"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...
Grand Designs tonight is about a couple who build a Huf Haus.

Ch4, 9pm.



Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....

Pity it's the wrong ones......
.andy

Makes you wonder if he slept through some of the cross-examinations
and evidence giving.

Nah. More like "Remember what happened to Kelly" said by a suitably
menacing
Alistair Campbell. Allegedly.

It will be interesting to read how much more comes out in 30 years
time.....

When no one will be interested as it was a storm in teacup.

"geoff" wrote in message
news
In message 0, mike
ring writes
"Martin" wrote in
:



Unless Hutton gets in the way I suspect - Heads are rolling as I
type.....


Nah, looks more like another Whitewash job

I didn't realise Lord H was Scotch till I heard his speech; so I guess
it's
the Scotch Mafia closing ranks again

If anyone's interested ...

"The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North Ireland,
is a classic representative of the British ruling establishment. A
member of the Anglo-Irish elite, he was educated at Shewsbury all boys
boarding school, and then Balliol, Oxford, before entering the exclusive
club of the British Judiciary. Whilst British Judges are overwhelmingly
conservative, upper class, white, male and biased, Hutton's background
is even more compromised.

The "establishment" is predominantly Conservative leaning. Blair put in a
man who on the surface would cut his balls given half the chance, a NI
protestant. Why did he do that? Because anyone looking at the situation
could only conclude that the government did not lie. Blair had nothing to
loose by installing a man, on the surface, hostile to his party.

In article ,
BillR wrote:
True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

I hated Thatcher but that sinking was correct.. alls fair in war.
Why would she have to explain it? we were at war, it was a warship so we
sank it... whats the problem?

Everyone seems to miss the point - that she lied.

--
*A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel so good *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
BillR wrote:
Nah, they don't pay Council Tax in Tooting, they're all on benefit...

I'd say you need to look at the house prices there before making such
assumptions...

New name for the area is "Twixt the Prisions"

What's a prision?

--
*And don't start a sentence with a conjunction *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
BillR wrote:
Makes absolutely no difference to the fact that Thatcher lied about
it. Same as Blair lying about those 'weapons of mass distruction'.
They'd both have earned more respect by simply telling the truth -
that they were said or done for propaganda reasons.

What a load of crap. Propaganda is a cheap war weapon so we should make
full use of it.... The 3rd rate nations milk it for all its worth, why
shouldn't we?

Do you actually read anything before commenting?

--
*The colder the X-ray table, the more of your body is required on it *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In message , PoP
writes
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:56:06 +0000, geoff wrote:

What do you expect with Hutton's track record

Would you care to expand on this theory? First I've heard of Hutton
having a track record.

Pinochet, Shayler, Bloody Sunday for a start IIRC
--
geoff

In message , IMM
writes

"geoff" wrote in message
news

If anyone's interested ...

"The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North Ireland,
is a classic representative of the British ruling establishment. A
member of the Anglo-Irish elite, he was educated at Shewsbury all boys
boarding school, and then Balliol, Oxford, before entering the exclusive
club of the British Judiciary. Whilst British Judges are overwhelmingly
conservative, upper class, white, male and biased, Hutton's background
is even more compromised.

The "establishment" is predominantly Conservative leaning. Blair put in a
man who on the surface would cut his balls given half the chance, a NI
protestant. Why did he do that? Because anyone looking at the situation
could only conclude that the government did not lie. Blair had nothing to
loose by installing a man, on the surface, hostile to his party.

But he has lost. In giving the government a clean bill of health over
this, (as in the Indy - "Whitewash"), there has been a total loss of
credibility
--
geoff

In message , John Rumm
writes
PoP wrote:

Whether the Belgrano sinking was right or wrong, it took place at a
time when war had been announced between two nations.

IIRC war was never declared over the Falklands - hence why it was
always the Falklands "conflict" and we never struck directly at air
bases etc on Argentine soil.

Having said that I am not too bothered about the Belgrano - sail a
military ship in and out of an exclusion zone during a conflict and you
have to be asking for trouble.

(Trivia for those that have not heard it befo The General Belgrano
was bought by Argentina from the US. It used to be called the USS
Phoenix, and as such was famous for being one of the few ships in Pearl
Harbour to survive the attack in 1941 - guess its luck had to run out
one day!)

As opposed to the Sheffield which was the ship which Marconi used to
advertise SCOT and other bits of kit.


--
geoff

In message , PoP
writes
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:45:14 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

IIRC war was never declared over the Falklands - hence why it was always
the Falklands "conflict" and we never struck directly at air bases etc
on Argentine soil.

You may be right.

Having said that I am not too bothered about the Belgrano - sail a
military ship in and out of an exclusion zone during a conflict and you
have to be asking for trouble.

Spot on. During my HP career I visited Northwood one time, and was
taken into the depths of the place - it's like a tower block built
upside down, you go in at the top and proceed downwards. It's where
the UK navy is controlled from (AIUI). Able to withstand anything but
a direct nuclear hit.

It's the operational centre in the event of war. It's where "the button"
is so to speak
--
geoff

In message , Dave Plowman
writes
In article ,
BillR wrote:
True. Think it really started with the Thatcher woman lying through
her teeth about the sinking of the Belgrano.

I hated Thatcher but that sinking was correct.. alls fair in war.
Why would she have to explain it? we were at war, it was a warship so we
sank it... whats the problem?

Everyone seems to miss the point - that she lied.

And history seems to be repeating itself
--
geoff

In message , Dave Plowman
writes
In article ,
BillR wrote:
Nah, they don't pay Council Tax in Tooting, they're all on benefit...

I'd say you need to look at the house prices there before making such
assumptions...

New name for the area is "Twixt the Prisions"

What's a prision?

Isn't that what causes variant CJD?
--
geoff

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 02:08:10 +0000, geoff wrote:

Pinochet, Shayler, Bloody Sunday for a start IIRC

I read your other reply, thanks.

Bliar is a smug git. He clearly organised Hutton knowing full well
he'd be given the all clear. Prior to this I had had some respect for
the UK legal system.

PoP

Sending email to my published email address isn't
guaranteed to reach me.

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:24:50 -0000, "BillR"
wrote:

Soldiers got killed in a war zone.... so what?

Charming. So El Presidente makes up a story to put our troops in a war
theatre, and lives are thrown away fighting in a conflict which should
not have taken place.

You must be a real source of comfort for wives and children that have
lost a loved one.

Yes there may have been a logistics problem, wars have been lost on such
issues but these are not normal business supply situations...

Cobblers. War is as much a manufacturing/supply process as any other
process. There's nothing particularly special about supplying to a war
theatre that sets it aside from regular resource planning activities.
You have a list of materials, supply route (and backup routes), and
knowledge of the time to ship. That allows you to plan the process to
deliver the materials at the point where they are needed.

PoP

Sending email to my published email address isn't
guaranteed to reach me.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:46:53 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

Everyone seems to miss the point - that she lied.

I'm missing the point here. What's the distinguishing feature you are
referring to? All Prime Ministers lie, and Bliar has turned it into a
fine art.

PoP

Sending email to my published email address isn't
guaranteed to reach me.