Green Goose

Had a Stock Dove in the garden today. Makes a nice change from the usual wood pigeons. It was on the ground picking up the crumbs from the bird feeder above.

Why not visit https://trapbarn.com and get the problem solved?

Not many people like rats so if you want a professional solution, I can supply you with the approved traps and safety tunnels. I can deliver locally or you can purchase direct via my website ... https://www.trapbarn.com I am local and can deliver F.O.C. Please PM if you have any queries.

It is our duty to help eradicate vermin - especially the non-native types. The grey squirrel is a foreign species which has proliferated and displaced our native red squirrels almost to the point of extinction. The reds are only to be found in a parts of Scotland a few minutes enclaves in England like the Isle of Wight. Grey squirrels are officially classified as vermin and anyone is entitled to take control measures. In fact it is our obligation to take positive action. This can be done legally provided the DEFRA approved equipment is used in the specified manner. I can supply you with the approved traps and safety tunnels. I can deliver locally or you can purchase direct via my website www.trapbarn.com An approved humane trap is only ?10.50 and the tunnel ?13.00. Please PM if you have any queries. Here is some supporting links?. https://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/infd-7rlgm2 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/27/red-squirrel-population-northern-italy http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_5-6-2014-14-51-16 https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/squirrel-pox-and-other-squirrel-diseases

Can we have today's sitrep please.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Green Goose Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > JoeLeg Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Green Goose Wrote: > > > > Do nogt forget the Labour government survived a > > motion of no confidence in December 1978 by ten > > votes after negotiating the support of the > Ulster > > Unionists. > > > > > > Party leaders, in my view, will do anything to > get > > back in to power. Similarly MP's will > compromise > > their views to get elected so I would not rule > > anything out. A supply and confidence > arrangement > > can be made to appear palatable to most. > > I agree with the principle of what you say, but I > think Labour/DUP is a bridge too far. Nothing's > impossible in politics, but in this day and age I > just can't see it happening. Well, stranger things HAVE happened. In 1979 the SNP went through the division lobby with the Tories to defeat Callaghans govt in a vote of no confidence. OK, it wouldnt happen today but it did.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Green Goose Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > JoeLeg Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Well then GG, ain't it lucky it's just the > > > bigoted, racist, reactionary, religiously > > driven > > > idiots with links to terrorists that we have > to > > > deal with? > > > > > > As you yourself pointed out, there's a lot of > > of > > > overlap at the fringes. > > > > If the election result was switched between Con > & > > Labour, most of Labour would be sorely tempted > to > > do a deal with the DUP after 7 years out of > power. > > Even JC might compromise a few of his > principles > > to become PM. If he didn't then there might be > a > > coup. > > They might be tempted but I doubt it would happen. > The DUP is anathema to Labour, and loathe Corbyn > and McDonnell personally. > > A Labour minority would be doing confidence and > supply with the LibDems I reckon. Do not forget the Labour government survived a motion of no confidence in December 1978 by ten votes after negotiating the support of the Ulster Unionists. Party leaders, in my view, will do anything to get back in to power. Similarly MP's will compromise their views to get elected so I would not rule anything out. A supply and confidence arrangement can be made to appear palatable to most.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well then GG, ain't it lucky it's just the > bigoted, racist, reactionary, religiously driven > idiots with links to terrorists that we have to > deal with? > > As you yourself pointed out, there's a lot of of > overlap at the fringes. If the election result was switched between Con & Labour, most of Labour would be sorely tempted to do a deal with the DUP after 7 years out of power. Even JC might compromise a few of his principles to become PM. If he didn't then there might be a coup.

Lordship 516 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The DUP consist of ex-paramilitary > members/sympathizers - Ulster Resistance & UVF > Hard on maintaining relationship with the rest of > the United Kingdom at any cost > Climate change deniers > Hard on Civil Rights > Hard on abortion > Hard on Gay marriage & LBGT rights - how they will > get on with the new openly gay Taoiseach will be > interesting > Hard on immigration - racist & sexist overtones > throughout their history even from Arlene Foster - > described Michelle O'Neill as 'blonde' > Agreed entirely. The DUP are stuck in a 1970's time warp. But hang on a bit, that's just like Jeremy who wants to take us back to nationalisation, union militancy, widespread strikes, flight of capital, plus wastefull spending funded by borrowing leading to devaluation of Sterling.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Green Goose Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > I reckon you will lose your bet. It will be > much > > closer to, if not, a hung parliament. The young > > (naive & idealistic) voters are highly > motivated > > this time and will be a major factor. > > Goosey calling it right... I?ve come in for a bit of opprobrium in the forum (some of it understandable) from a few who disagreed with my robust take on certain issues, so your acknowledgement of my forecast is appreciated. How did I call it, you may ask? Let me start by saying I voted, but neither Tory or Labour. I took a totally objective stance (some may say cynical) and assessed only key factors. In descending order of importance here?s what I rated. 1. The word on the street was that many, many more youngsters were registering to vote than ever before. They are na?ve and idealistic. They are heavily into social media where there is lots of fake tweets created by twitterbots. 2. Many voters go for the party that will give them a positive pecuniary outcome. They will compromise their ideals if there is a financial benefit. That said, the biggie (for the new voters and their parents) was scrapping tuition fees and wiping out earlier tuition debt. Then there was the triple lock and the winter fuel allowance and scares about senior bus passes. Few understand that, just like with credit cards, govts cannot just keep on borrowing to meet day to day expenses ? debt always bites you in the bum in the end. 3. The middle-aged and elderly are mostly influenced by TV coverage. The coverage, as always, was biased against the Tories ? e.g. sneering Laura Keunnesberg. 4. TM came across as weak and did U-turns. She depended solely on Fiona Hill & Nick Timothy, her advisors, who got the strategy wrong and they sidelined Lynton Crosby who is a known winner. They didn?t exploit the dangers of nationalisation, union influence and fiscal indiscipline. They made Brexit an issue when they need not have done. They didn?t attack Labour, 5. JC surprised everybody by coming across as a cuddly avuncular type who could be trusted. 6. Never, ever be influenced by the bookies odds. They make money, almost always. They would have pulled in a massive amount with their offer of 1/4 on for a Con overall majority. Getting a 25% return on your money is not bad at all. Now guess who I voted for.

Let's have a photo when you have it cornered. If you really want to catch it here is one way that does work and is based on the fact that rats and mice feel most comfortable when moving about if they have contact with a vertical surface. Thats why they run along. walls and love tunnels. The bits you need are... 1. A six foot length of plastic down pipe. 2. A pair of latex gloves. 3. A roll of gaffer tape 4. A glue trap for rats or mice. 5. Hacksaw. Put on the gloves to minimise human scent. (VIP) Now, cut the length of pipe in half. Roll the glue trap into a tube that is marginally smaller than the inside diameter of the pipe. The sticky side must be on the inside of the roll. Slip the glue trap roll halfway into one end of the pipe. Secure it with a little tape. Take the other piece of pipe and slip it over the other half of the glue trap roll. Use the gaffer tape to join the two pieces of pipe. Place the pipe on the floor along a wall say behind the sofa. If you can get the sofa up tight against the pipe then so much better. Go to pub and have a few pints then come back and check. If it is not there go back to pub. Repeat as necessary. Better still get a Mark 4 from https://trapbarn.com GG

Many people will own Santander shares as a result of the take-over of Abbey National some years ago. So today's news that Santander has been leaned on to take over the failing Popular Bank is not good news. This enforced take-over has come about as a result of a directive from Brussels (under their SRB policy) as a means of avoiding a state bailout. Even though this is a problem with a Spanish bank, the govt there cannot step in financially because of the EU. This is very similar to Lloyds being leaned on by Gordon Brown to take over HBOS and as we all know it put Lloyds under govt control in the end. Existing shareholders of Santander will be faced with a cash call to the tune of ?6.1 Bn. More may needed to be raised later. Just shows how all-pervading Brussels control can be. I sold my A.N. shares years ago so I just wish remaining Santander share owners in the UK the best of luck.

Drat Robbin, you spoiled it.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For your information, Mr.Goose, divertissement, > while obviously derived from the French as is so > much of our language, is listed in the Oxford > English Dictionary as an English word with its > first recorded usage as such noted as 1719. > Therefore only an ignoramus would think that it > should be italicized or placed in inverted > comments . RH, had you used it in the context of music it would have been appropriate but your actual words were... Quote "dealing with you is anything other than a minor divertissment in my teabreak" Unquote Like JayW, you were just showing off.

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do hope you are right GG. > > As for ressentiment, there was no misspelling. > > The great thing is that there is hope even for > you. You do not have to be able to afford to buy > the Genealogy of Morals, you could just look on > Wikepedia under ressentiment (if you do, please > make a donation to that excellent site in > penance). > I raised the point, as I said, "for the sake of good order" as the normal protocol, when using foreign words, is to use italics or inverted comments. The "resentment" spelling is good enough for most of us without you having to underline your assumed intellectual/educational superiority. You have much in common with RH and his use of divertissement.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need > -to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/ > > Diane Abbott is an intelligent, caring and > articulate woman who has been bullied and > subjected to vile abuse of the kind shown in that > article for years. Most of that may be true but it is a rather sanitised biography and it omits quite a lot. But it does prove that no matter what background and chances in life, one can progress to to the highest level. But she does not have a firm grasp of her brief (laziness?) which is why she fails miserably when confronted by a competent interviewer on a one to one basis. She was fortunate to get dropped into a safe Labour seat by virtue to her close links with Bernie Grant and and others. This also fitted with Labour's desire for more diversity. Then of course there is the JC intimacy. She is a hypocrit (e.g. private schooling) and an anti-white racist. Does not have a grasp of economics or even a head for numbers. She parrots idealogical slogans because she does not have the ability to think politically on her feet. Changes her political views as frequently as she changes her hair style. Somewhat of a liability.

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well the betting markets are stabilising around an > expectation of a Tory majority of between 75 and > 100 seats. I have money on the majority being > greater than this. I think the 'surprise' of this > election may (unfortunately) be that the overall > majority is a LOT higher than this. > > It is all fairly straightforward, and VERY > depressing. > > - intergenerational failure (why should we care > about young people) > - island self-inwardness and cultural in-breeding > - ressentiment of the lower middle-classes (who > certainly have had to put up with a lot) > - dominance of atomistic individualism (shopping > equals choice) > - the illusion that I did well by hard work and > intelligence, so why can't they? > - failure to understand any economic principles > separating real and nominal values > - mercantilist notions of trade (fill up the > container with gold, we will be better off having > nothing to do with foreigners) > - rejection of all compromise in negotiation (the > attack on Corbyn over Ireland) > - a disgraceful and contemptible national press > - a willingness by the Conservative party to > pander to xenophobia (to put it gently) I reckon you will lose your bet. It will be much closer to, if not, a hung parliament. The young (naive & idealistic) voters are highly motivated this time and will be a major factor. The ten points you make seem to conform to that same naive idealistic mindset. And, for the sake of good order, your ressentiment normally appears as resentment.

Doesn't need words http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t643/savedelhi/Public%20Album/f7780660-05fd-452f-a3ff-e2ac557e362e_zpsvmzaxopx.jpg

Just had a nightmare...... http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t643/savedelhi/Public%20Album/Corbin2_zps23e3f7on.jpg

Here's one that sticks in the memory. http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t643/savedelhi/Public%20Album/green_zpsywemnn4g.png

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Come on, May saying she'll 'rip up the human > rights act' is just ridiculous politicking and has > no bearing on what's happened. How about properly > funding the security services as a start Good of you to raise the issue of security services. Here's a little press cutting from November 2016. Is this what we can expect if JC and Mcdonnell get in? John McDonnell, Labour's shadow chancellor, called for MI5 and the UK's armed police force to be scrapped in a controversial campaign letter. It demands that special police squads - like those that hunt terror suspects - be disbanded, as well as the Monarchy and the House of Lords. The letter, organised by The Socialist Network as part of their ?Socialist Campaign For a Labour Victory? was also signed by a group of Labour-supporting unions. In a tweet accompanying a picture of him holding the list of demands Labour's shadow chancellor said the campaign: "Is important for ensuring a clear program of socialist demands on a Labour government". http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t643/savedelhi/Public%20Album/odonnel_zpsjwmttowk.jpg

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't get me wrong Quids, I'm not saying Corbyn > wasn't an utter twat to do what he did - but I > regard May's cosying up to the Saudis as just as > bad, indeed worse as she's giving Britain's > imprimatur to the pretty heinous wrongs of the > Saudi regime. The thing about realpolitik is that > it removes any moral dimension and also has a > habit of biting one in the arse when the winds > shift: it was realpolitik to sell arms to both the > Iranians and Iraqis during the 1980s and that > didn't work out so well, did it? Reality means we sometimes have to hold our noses when we do business with vile regimes. The Al Yamanah deal with the Saudis back in the 80's was worth around ?43 Billion and kept huge swathes of UK industry working. It is still expected to pull in a further ?40Bn in support, training , spares etc. The chances of getting more are slim however because BAE was charged in USA courts of "illegal accounting" in relation to this deal. In other words giving kickbacks. This expose means the Saudis will not place new orders with the UK because they were embarassed -even though the reality is that every arms deal involves kickbacks and uses middlemen. Been there and seen it. Now, would you believe it but just a couple of weeks ago Trump visits Saudi and signs deals arms deals worth $300 Billion. Nice one, but very similar to the way that Capital Hill eviscerated BP over the Macondo spillage. Politics and business are deeply intertwined.

Lordship 516 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > with internment you only create guerrilla > academies which these type of people would love to > have. Some prisons have this facility for > extremists already & it is very difficult to > interrupt this effect. The only effective method > is to remove them from the UK entirely - revoke > their right to stay in the UK & deport them to > wherever they came from - if they weren't born in > the UK. Pass emergency laws & temporarily > derogate from the Human Rights conventions for > particular purposes. If they have were born in the > UK have them commit to a contract & relocate them > in some secure manner. > > Difficult problem but has to be approached with a > robust solution - otherwise other Manchesters & > London Bridges await us for the future. I agree - robust action is needed urgently. We have been so very naive and tolerant. Love and Christian prayers for peace just do not cut any ice with Islamic terrorists. They are bullies. These Jihadis are deranged terrorists and they work on fear and our inertia. They recognise only two things Allah and force. Therefor we have to use FORCEFULL measures against them. Such action include:--- 1. Declare a state of emergency, now. 2. Have an armed soldier accompany each policeman on patrol. Hence police numbers are effectively doubled. 3. Derogate the Human Rights legislation which the terrorists have exploited for the last 20years and which has made HR lawyers rich. 4. Stop all young muslim males of UK origin from returning to the UK after being away in a muslim country. 5. Stop all young muslim males from going overseas - unless they emigrate permanently. 6. Deport any who are on the watch list if they are of foreign origin. 7. Set up a detainment camp on Lundy Island for the others on the watch list. If they want to leave Lundy then let them go to a muslim country of their choice, after they agree to have a small crescent tatoo on each of their forearms. I know it will incense the Libs and it will take ploitical fortitude. it is the only course of action which will avoid a disaster and it has to be done quickly otherwise we will have an ever-growing problem on our hands.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of course even when talking about terrorism - this > guy was known > > Why wasn't he watched Our liberal democracy only allows us to lock up convicted offenders. The police can be alerted about countless dangerous Jihadis but until one of them breaks the law then there is not much they can do. If its just a matter of having hate DVDs the they get a warning slap on the wrist. The Liberals and Labour Luvvies have campaigned for years against strong measures on terrorists. Corbyn is a prime example of never blaming terrorism on the terrorists. He even got pally with them - from the IRA tho' to the PLO and a ragbag of other killers. Blair and Brown allowed Abu Hamza to spread his poison outside Finsbury mosque for years and did nothing about it. Same with Choudry. These recent incidents are just the very first indications of what is to come. Strong and decisive measures need to be taken NOW at the very first signs of potential trouble. Deportation, isolation and ultimately.......... You speculate. When we get a car bomb every day and London, Manchester, B'ham etc start to look like Beirut, it will be too late.

karen s Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ignorance is bliss lol. > "America is a classless society", not to mention > your other quotes lol. .. You obviously have not > heard of the Ghettos then you must be living with > blinkers on lol. > Instead of watching the football try watching > something a bit more educational. You are getting confused between class and wealth. There's plenty wealthy people out there with very little class. And seeing as you have mentioned football that is a sector where there's a lot of wealthy players who got where they are by dedication to training and honing their skills.