saleem

Why all the snide remarks? Have any of you any experience in ejecting trespassers/ramblers?

Official channels haven't yeilded the result we anticipated. Direct action is the only course of action left open to us. I'm taking a hammer with me. That way, if things get out of hand, I can claim I was performing maintainance on the property in defense. Though if all goes according to plan, we won't be there longer than ten minutes.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can't help with the lynchmob, saleem, but > wondered if you might be in the market for a > girlfriend..? I like a man who's a bit tasty. Thank you, but I have a bride waiting for me back home. We marry when she's older.

More advice, less attempts at humour, please. D-Day is scheduled for Friday.

Why should I do those things? They have no cause to be in the building. They're not welcome.

My best friend had asked me over the phone if I'd be willing to assist him in removing some people from a property that he owns in North London. I have a personal interest in their eviction, because they've ignored my pleas to return the laptop that's got my family albums stored on it that I left with some other belongings that he let me store there. He says we there's four squatters, who the law is protecting, and that we'll need twice that amount. So far we've only got six volunteers. Some of my colleagues tell me they're jealous because it sounds fun. I'm anxious because my friend wants s take along a baseball bat in case there's any trouble. Has anyone ever done this? How should we approach it, tactically speaking?

Regardless of where they come from, Democrats are, statistically, more likely to harbour racist tendancies than the right-wing. Their ideology encourages this, whereas classical liberals of old, like JFK, were more centrist than Obama's administration, who lean further left than their predecessors. With any luck we'll see a GOP victory this year.

Alex K Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Good for him. Ties them into the tax / benefits / > health care systems. Integration into society > rather than discrimination and rejection. > > These are kids who were brought by their parents, > grew up American without more than hearsay contact > with their parents' cultures (well, they couldn't > exactly go "home" summers to visit their nan, > could they?)... acknowledge that they're Yanks > and embrace them as such. Points up the > Republicans for the spiteful racists that they > are. This is ignorant, partisan rhetoric. Although neither side of the political spectrum enjoys a monopoly on racism, the Democrats have had a disproportionate number of senators exposed as clansmen compared to the RepublicansSen. R Byrd (who recieved a state funeral) being a notable example

The most refreshing aspect of the tournament was seeing Ashley Cole on the pitch, as opposed to featuring under accusatory headlines.

I buy i, the Independent's condensed daily. Online I read the Telegraph.

I don't think the Socialist Worker can provide the dose of sanctimony The Guardian's readership crave.

Trashy rag for liberal filth.

And I can just picture all the signature facial contortions that accompany each gag.

I thought Carr's principle means of income were his energetic eyebrows? But yes, you're quite correct that he'd risk alienating his overall source of income, which would be counter-productive considering the need for cash being one of the conditions of entering into schemes like K2. But, then again, George Best essentially stuck both fingers up at the world by going to the pub after he'd recovered from a liver transplant. And the mob still adored him.

"Poor Jimmy" should of stuck to his guns and reiterated the circumstances surrounding his involvement with K2. That being that he's paid the amount of tax he's legally obliged to pay the taxman, and that there isn't a man, woman or child watching events unfold who wouldn't consider exploiting the same loophole if they had the means made available to them. I know I would!

Fathers4Justice?

Apologies if my termonology implied that Carr was sticking it to 'the man', or I oppose all forms of government. But this all boils down to control. Instances like this are the anithesis of what the government wishes to istill and foster among the populace: supplicancy. Carr was made aware of profitable small print, applied by the judiciary and supported by the ombudsman. He sought clarification for himself instead of relying on the powers that be to spell it out for him, and he (legally) profitted from his insight. The real fear is the majority taking the same course of action. That's why he's being condemned the way he is.

Were the would-be abductors apprehended?

As opposed to the notion of fair play, that's compounded by the economic climate we find ourselves in, all he's done is exploit an existing loophole that's only divulged to people who have an income that can be profitable for both parties. Civil servants and the emergency services don't earn enough to reap worthwhile returns for the facilitaters: they aren't worth it. I suspect the reason the government takes such umbrage at these schemes is because it draws attention to their complacency and highlights the prolateriat's naivity. For instance, the TV Licensing Authority took exception to my refusal to buy a TV license on the grounds that I wasn't recieving a transmitted signal, which are the grounds for buying one in the first place. They expected me to just roll over and pay up. I didn't, I stuck to the law, and profitted from it. Just because I own a TV, that doesn't mean I have to buy a TV license. I just watch DVDs, not live or recorded transmissions. The fact that Cameron himself painted Carr as "immoral" is indicative of how embarrassed they are over the K2 tax avoidance scheme, which is entirely legal. They've given Carr both barrels because they've correctly predicted that he won't want his reputation to be sullied by negative publicity, and because he runs the risk of being bankrupted by launching a defamation claim through the courts. Exploiting legal loopholes to avoid paying the accepted threshold of tax is big business in the UK. The difference being is that a lot of these avoiders contribute a disproportionate level of GDP, and have the means to coerce those who weild influence at the top into silence. Carr stood to sustain serious and visible damage if he didn't roll over and accept his 'punishment' like a snivelling, supplicant bitch.

http://www.clubrapid.com/upload_directory/fun/8/723.jpg

I love Come Dine With Me for all the wrong reasons. It's perfected the reality TV formula: addictively awkward viewing. I never watch it for the dishes served, rather how the losers who appear on the show struggle to maintain a false veneer of friendship for the duration of the show. It's priceless.

Lame.

Does DKH's manager post on here?

Whichever store you buy it from, their bread baked instore always comes with a cavernous cavity/air pocket through the loaf. It's a joke, and I've lost count of how many times I've taken it back for a refund, where I'm met with reluctance. Save yourself money and time by avoiding the bread baked instore by any branch belonging to these charlatans. DKH is no exception.

Close, I work in petrochemicals. But how long until these bus and train drivers wrestle their way into ?50,000 a year in exchange for not holding commuters at their mercy whenever they spy an opportunity to squeeze more money out of an already well-wrung stone?