Mark J
-
Posts
7,993 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Classifieds
Tip Site Directory
Blogs
Articles
News
Arborist Reviews
Arbtalk Knot Guide
Gallery
Store
Freelancers directory
Everything posted by Mark J
-
You might benefit from a trip to the opticians mate.
-
Is 'probably' good enough though?
-
Has anyone else noticed how quiet Rees Mog is about the whole Syria thing? I reckon he's biding his time for a power grab. Which wouldn't suprise me.
-
I've no idea. The fact that all three people who were exposed to it are still alive, suggests a level of incompetence somewhere along the line.
-
Who here doesn't employ people to do the jobs they don't want to do themselves?
-
I do as it happens. If a Prime Minister of a country should seek to act without the consent of parliament, then they should have a clear mandate. The current Government had to bolster (buy) seats in order to attain their majority. If they'd legitimately won their place then I would have no argument. I may disagree with their actions but that's how democracy works. That's not to say that I'd happily go along with whatever they said without parliamentary approval. There's a way to do things and it's imperitave to do them that way. It's like that bloke who killed the burglar lately. He was charged and then the CPS decided to take No Further Action. That means that it wasn't in the 'Public Interest' to pursue a conviction. They still followed protocol.
-
I meant Matty's block, never used a Hobbs or GRCS.
-
You'd think they'd think it through rather than having to 'Backtrack' Aye, but only if she gets the DUP's permission first.
-
Fair enough, I agree with you in that respect. I wouldn't say I was pro Russia mind, Putin is about as bad as they come. That's not to say I entirely trust any of the world leaders. Russia do have a naval base in Syria, I'm not sure they have that many other outside the old Soviet Union though. I imagine they'd want to protect their interests. Indeed, 'know your enemy' has been bastardised throughout time.
-
Having used said block, I don't see any reason you'd need anything else.
-
Also Dan, you've got to think that if you're not getting many calls, then your competitiors probably aren't either. Keep ahad, you'll pick up their business when they fold. If, and only you can make the decision, that it's a non runner, then quit while you're behind. But don't let a bad jump put you out of the race.
-
Aye, but it doesn't say it came from Russia. I used to know sources of extremely potent LSD but it didn't come from Albert Hoffman.
-
No one voted for May remember. She's only PM because Cameron the pig lover bailed out after the referendum result.
-
What I meant, was that if these peoples' homes get blown up through our military's actions, then it would be hypocritical to refuse them safe sanctuary in our own country. I hope that the solution will be found without recourse for missile strikes. However, the government has a record of interventions without the express will of the people. That makes them as bad as the 'enemy' in my eyes, and betrays the values we are supposed to uphold. Without the "fucking meddling" of Russia and Iran, the Islamic State would be right where everyone said they would be.
-
You'd hope that within fifty years we may have embraced clean, sustainable energy. I for one would be quite happy herding goats and fishing for pearls in my 90's.
-
I just hate fascists. What I'm suggesting isn't particularly right wing, or any wing in fact, it's just how it is as I see it. Unnecessary labels help no-one. The thing is though, that the West can't let the middle East do it's own thing due to the heavily armed Israeli govenment. And the oil. Let's not forget the oil.
-
Starting at the top and working down Kevin: While I agree that ideally people should be temporarily rehoused in a safer neighbouring country, would we not be somewhat hypocritical by not offering them sanctuary if we were responsible for their displacement? (I'm not suggesting that we scoop up the displaced in a C-10 and drop them off at Skegness) Do you then agree that there should be no military action without Parliamentary approval? Economic and diplomatic action aimed Who and Why? You probably know about this than most on this forum, certainly more than I do.
-
I think that a Prime Minister making their own decisions is a slippery slope to be on. Tony Blair didn't really help when he went down that route. I reckon that May has (and knows she has) the spine of a sea cucumber and the diplomatic skills of chest of drawers.
-
Do people here reckon that we should be engaging in war in Syria? Daesh (ISIL, ISIS, Islamic State) were the enemy. Assad and his supporters (Russia, Iran, Kurdistan) kicked Daesh's ass. Why should we get involved? I know there's the 'supposed' pipeline that's to be built across Syria. The claims regarding Assad's use of chemical weapons, which, incidently, we sold to them, are spurious at best. If you agree that we should take 'action', do you think that it should be only be undertaken with the approval of parliament? Given that we live in a democracy. Finally, if further war based atrocities are to occur in Syria, should we house the refugees whose homes and families have been obliterated, untill it's safe for them to return.
-
Bet the beech is still needing tickled...
-
The best things usually have.... Canny pertinent though given that it looks like she's pushing for military action without parliamentary approval.
-
-
Metoffice app isn't as good as @peckerwoo (Wherever he's gone) but it's canny for the short term: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/services/mobile-digital-services/weather-app Grismal here.
-
Aye, the situation shouldn't have been allowed to get to this point either.
