In message , at 13:49:48 on 
Sat, 7 Jun 2008, keith  remarked:
>I do not believe that there are conditions of carriage/or contract and
>by-laws which are so ill-defined that they "depend on the
>circumstances at the time".  Those circumstances *should*  be defined.
>I can agree that there may be some badly worded legislation which *is*
>open to interpretation but I am not aware of any in the circumstances
>quoted.
>
>Have you many examples?

Cases are always being thrown out of court on what are commonly known as 
"technicalities", which is code for "we know he did it, but the law 
isn't sufficiently clear that it's illegal".

As for lack of clarity in railway regulations, those are all around us. 
Just look at the currently running subthread on breaking a journey.
-- 
Roland Perry

Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?

a. Not at all
b. A bit
c. A lot
d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off

BrianW wrote:
> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>
> a. Not at all
> b. A bit
> c. A lot
> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off

It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his window. 
As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is perfectly OK as long as 
the reason is one that he supports.

On 7 Jun, 15:43, "Brimstone"  wrote:
> BrianW wrote:
> > Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> > causes he believes in. �I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> > newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> > aims. �However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> > put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>
> > a. Not at all
> > b. A bit
> > c. A lot
> > d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off
>
> It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his window> As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is perfectly OK as long as
> the reason is one that he supports.

OK, let's assume it is the Catford Rodent Protection Society, who,
having read Doug's post about killing mice, decide to take matters
into their own hands.  Poetic justice and all that.

BrianW wrote:
> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
> 
> a. Not at all
> b. A bit
> c. A lot
> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off

Generally speaking I would be against doing that myself so my first 
answer would be 'a'
If of course it had been a protest group, then 'c'
If it was one that he has supported then 'e'

-- 
Tony the Dragon

BrianW wrote:
> On 7 Jun, 15:43, "Brimstone"  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>>> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
>>> causes he believes in. ?I sense that most of the rest of us on this
>>> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further
>>> political aims. ?However, how much would you laugh if you heard
>>> that someone had put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>>
>>> a. Not at all
>>> b. A bit
>>> c. A lot
>>> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off
>>
>> It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his
>> window. As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is
>> perfectly OK as long as the reason is one that he supports.
>
> OK, let's assume it is the Catford Rodent Protection Society, who,
> having read Doug's post about killing mice, decide to take matters
> into their own hands.  Poetic justice and all that.

Ah, OK, protection of defenceless animals and all that. 'nuff said.

He deserves everything he gets being as he's spoken up for animal rights in 
the past.

Which means that he's a legitimate target on two counts. 1) for harming and 
killing defenceless animals for no good reason (good reasons include to 
provide food for people) and 2) being a hypocrite who supports those who 
commit violence in the name of "animal rights" whilst harming animals 
because they allegedly cause him inconvenience.

BrianW wrote:
> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>
> a. Not at all
> b. A bit
> c. A lot
> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off

Following clarification, d.

On 7 Jun, 15:43, "Brimstone"  wrote:
> BrianW wrote:
> > Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> > causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> > newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> > aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> > put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>
> > a. Not at all
> > b. A bit
> > c. A lot
> > d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off
>
> It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his window.
> As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is perfectly OK as long as
> the reason is one that he supports.

So if it were a drunken chav on the way home after a skinful of best,
it would be ironic as doug supports Camra.
If it were a member of alcoholics anonymous protesting at doug
supporting Camra, it would be equally ironic as doug supports
alcoholics anonymous.

If it were someone out for a bit of the old ultra-violence, doug would
be equally pleased, because after doug claims to be an anarchist.

NotMe wrote:
> On 7 Jun, 15:43, "Brimstone"  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>>> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
>>> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
>>> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
>>> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
>>> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>>> a. Not at all
>>> b. A bit
>>> c. A lot
>>> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off
>> It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his window.
>> As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is perfectly OK as long as
>> the reason is one that he supports.
> 
> So if it were a drunken chav on the way home after a skinful of best,
> it would be ironic as doug supports Camra.
> If it were a member of alcoholics anonymous protesting at doug
> supporting Camra, it would be equally ironic as doug supports
> alcoholics anonymous.

'Scuse, me, having been a member of Camra for almost as long as its been 
going, can I say we don't condone anyone becoming a chav or an 
alcoholic. Far be it from me to perpetuate the beard, arran sweater and 
sandals with socks image...

-- 
John Wright

"What would happen if you eliminated the autism genes from the gene pool?

You would have a bunch of people standing around in a cave, chatting and
socialising and not getting anything done!" - Professor Temple Grandin

On 7 Jun, 17:41, John Wright  wrote:
> NotMe wrote:
> > On 7 Jun, 15:43, "Brimstone"  wrote:
> >> BrianW wrote:
> >>> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> >>> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> >>> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> >>> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> >>> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
> >>> a. Not at all
> >>> b. A bit
> >>> c. A lot
> >>> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off
> >> It would depend on the reason that they had put a brick through his window.
> >> As Doug has so often told us, any violent action is perfectly OK as long as
> >> the reason is one that he supports.
>
> > So if it were a drunken chav on the way home after a skinful of best,
> > it would be ironic as doug supports Camra.
> > If it were a member of alcoholics anonymous protesting at doug
> > supporting Camra, it would be equally ironic as doug supports
> > alcoholics anonymous.
>
> 'Scuse, me, having been a member of Camra for almost as long as its been
> going, can I say we don't condone anyone becoming a chav or an
> alcoholic. Far be it from me to perpetuate the beard, arran sweater and
> sandals with socks image...

My apologies on the slur on your name, and that of Camra.

"NotMe"  wrote in message 
news:c8d2bf3e-ab54-4c52-9d1e-a8445491c237@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> So if it were a drunken chav on the way home after a skinful of best,
> it would be ironic as doug supports Camra.

Well there goes my membership.

On 7 Jun, 15:34, BrianW  wrote:
> Gollum is fond of advocating and justifying violence in support of
> causes he believes in.  I sense that most of the rest of us on this
> newsgroup have a revulsion of the use of violence to further political
> aims.  However, how much would you laugh if you heard that someone had
> put Gollum's windows through with a few bricks?
>
> a. Not at all
> b. A bit
> c. A lot
> d. So hard that my bollocks would fall off

He probably would not care, the council will fix it for him his carer
will see to that.
NM

Kubica ;)

"Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote

> Kubica ;)


The bastards come over here stealing decent black folk's jobs... ;-)


-- 
Regards, Vince.

Long Distance Diary 30th May 2008-  Switzerland

http://trucknetuk.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=32454

"Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote in message 
news:WKudnfKB1unqutHVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> Kubica ;)

Poland 1, Germany 0 - unlike the football

On 8 Jun, 19:39, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
> Kubica ;)

If people driving to work is "frivolous hypermobility" in Gollum's
book, I wonder what phrase he uses to describe Formula 1 (*)?

*My own phrase of choice is "fucking dull"

On 2008-06-08, BrianW  wrote:
> On 8 Jun, 19:39, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> Kubica ;)
>
> If people driving to work is "frivolous hypermobility" in Gollum's
> book, I wonder what phrase he uses to describe Formula 1 (*)?
>
> *My own phrase of choice is "fucking dull"

Oh, I thought it was a moderately amusing accident.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2008-06-08, BrianW  wrote:
> > On 8 Jun, 19:39, "Depresion" <127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >> Kubica ;)
> >
> > If people driving to work is "frivolous hypermobility" in Gollum's
> > book, I wonder what phrase he uses to describe Formula 1 (*)?
> >
> > *My own phrase of choice is "fucking dull"
> 
> Oh, I thought it was a moderately amusing accident.

Tchah, yoof of today, innit? He was probably listening to that awful
industrial noise on his iPod and not looking where he was going.