matelot

It seems a lot of hassle for £80. However there seems a fair chance you'll get more work from it. I'd imagine a lot of church goers are wealthy with large gardens.

Islam has been fighting kafir for the last 1500 years. It's really not surprising they continue to do it in Europe Enoch Powell was right

Wow! You've posted something I 100% agree with. We better go buy some lottery tickets to see what other miracles might happen.

to be fair it was a twitter feed from someone in Syria - not the best source. A quick google search says 7 dead. I'd suggest that 59 tomahawks killing only 7 people means the Syrians were warned of the attack...

I've seen reports that no Syrians or Russians were killed in the raid I've also heard that no Syrian planes were destroyed It looks like Trump warned the Russians he was going to bomb Syria. The Russians told the Syrians and they moved their people out the airfield. I've also heard that the cruise missiles all landed on the same place It looks like it was more a "shot across the bows" than a proper attack

It's bizarre. Assad and the Russians were winning the war and then Trump wades in because they used chemical weapons. Why would Assad risk an American bombing by using chemical weapons when he had nearly won? I call "fake news" on this. Anyway, is using chemical weapons really that much worse then conventional weapons? I don't really see much difference between being blown up and being gassed. I have to admit I'm disappointed in Trump over this. It looks like he might be Hilary Clinton in a suit.

duplicate

In Syria we have two choices as to who runs the country. Option A. President Assad, a secular dictator that ran the country reasonably well. or; Option B. Islamist head choppers that will kill everyone that doesn't follow their line of Islam. We tried regime change in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Egypt and it never worked out. It's about time we just accepted that some regions are only stable when they have a strongman president.

That's it. When it's below about 3 degrees bricklaying should stop. I've seen mortar when it has frozen when it was still "green". You could crumble it between your fingers.

In a couple of weeks I'll be doing a 72 hour week and earning some serious coin. I'll be earning the same in ten days as I was earning in a month as a salary slave Anyone else make some good money on a job or contract? I'd imagine after storms a lot of people here are rolling in it?

I'm just making the point that there seems to be remarkable few deaths from left over ordinance from WW2.....

You're the guy that found a shell and decided to have a poke about to see if they were any more. You then got a metal detector to see what else was there. You then moved the shells to the bottom of the garden. What PPE did you have to handle those explosives? Some sunglasses and a metal bin lid as a shield? Millions of bombs were dropped in the UK in WW2. Many of them never went off. Since we don't hear much news about these bombs killing people it seems reasonable to say they are relatively "safe".

To be fair how many times have we seen news stories about people/ dogs digging up bombs and they don't blow up? If I found a bomb in my garden I'd treat it with respect as well. However I'd be thinking that after 70 years in a wet environment it probably wouldn't blow up.

To be fair to brickies, their trade is out in the weather and one of the more likely ones to be stopped due to bad weather.

To be fair to Vespasian I've been to an explosive course where the instructor said that all explosives (apart from dynamite) got safer over time. I personally can't see many explosives having much punch after being buried in soil for 70 years.

The main problem the BBC have is that many people no longer trust them... The other problem the BBC have is that their arguments aren't very good. With respect, if you don't want the West to lurch to the political right you will need better arguments than a photo shopped image of Trump..

Mark, The BBC are meant to be impartial. I've seen many incidences where the BBC have presented misleading information or only told one side of a story. For a democracy to work well you need media that are relatively unbiased.

The BBC likes to think itself as a serious news outlet. Do you think photo shopped images are a worthwhile "news" item for the BBC? I'd suggest such images should be left on places like facebook? When Obama was elected were there any similar photo shopped images on the BBC? Jimmy Savile was a major star of the BBC. During his time at the BBC there were consistent rumours about his sexual activities. The BBC decided to ignore these rumours because he was such a big star. Jimmy Savile should have been sent to jail for what he did. You'll excuse me if I feel no guilt about getting two months free BBC licence.

Perhaps you're happy with the BBC presenting "news" like this but I'm not.

The BBC is politically biased. Why should I be forced to pay money to them? I do my bit for society: I do charity work. I give blood. Before Christmas I gave £1000 to charities...

I think up to last year you never needed a licence if you only watched the BBC on the internet. However I think you need a TV licence now I got some payback on the BBC last year. I got my renewal notice in and I ignored it for two months. When I did pay it I told them I wasn't in my flat for the two months and it effectively meant I got two months free

My opinion of the BBC reaches a new low. At least North Korea gets their propaganda for free. We have to pay for it Nick Robinson: BBC has no duty to 'broadly balance'*Brexit reports as referendum is over

If you are working on a road with a 30mph speed limit I don't think putting out road work signs alters the speed limit. From what I understand if you want to reduce the speed limit you will have to consult the police and council... Chapter 8 of the Traffic Signs Manual is the bible of road works and temporary works signing. I've put a link below, however the document is hard to follow. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/203669/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-08-part-01.pdf

I don't think I've ever seen a thread on CCF here. Since I think it's an interesting idea I thought I'd start a thread. I love the idea of CCF ie better habitat for wildlife and not being forced to sell masses of timber when prices are low. However I just don't see how it can work in the UK. Surely if you clear a patch of wood it means you get windblow in neighbouring plots? I cant see how removing a couple of trees from an acre can make much financial sense? Has anyone seen it work successfully in the UK?

I remember the first tree I ever cut down. I was 15 and cut down this spruce that was in a wood. I was so excited as I cut away with my bow saw as I expected the tree to fall over like in the movies. The saw eventually went right through the tree and the tree just stood there. It looked like the tree had grown magically up through the middle of my saw Obviously I never considered that the neighbouring trees would hold the tree up If your client wants a natural looking wood that he can walk through perhaps you should be considering a fairly heavy thin and replanting with native trees? In an ideal world I think you should clearfell the lot and plant with native trees. However if your customer wants to keep some trees perhaps you could clearfell the centre of the wood and leave the perimeter trees? The perimeter trees are likely to suffer windblow but they will still shelter any trees you plant. PS I've learned a fair amount on this thread. So thanks everyone for posting