At a glance: Queen's Speech

Ollie

for gods sakes lighten up.....

Paul Watson

Simon Walton wrote: I'd rather pay for my healthcare. I have been waiting for a hospital appointment now for 8 months, and I doubt I'll get it this yea Correct me if I am wrong but then why don't you pay more and go to a private/non-NHS hospital? AFAIK NHS is supposed to be a "base level" of medical care. Simon Walton wrote: The NHS staff are fantastic - they work for so little pay (firefighters take note) and do a great job considering how under-funded they are. Unfortunately, a lot of people take their frustrations of the NHS out on the staff. I often hear reports on how the government over there is planning to re-vamp NHS and make it better and pump more money in and etc. blah etc. Maybe it needs to fail completely before anything is done.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

benjymous wrote: Saddam Dubbuyuh Hussain?

David Wulff

Excuse me? :confused:

David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk

"Life, as well as software, has bugs." - Roger Wright

Giles

Simon Walton wrote: Euro I'm really against this for political reasons too intellectually advanced for anyone here to understand. Also, the coins are stupid. ooOOOOO!!! Go on then give us a try. Personally, its just an oportunity for Luxembourg to tighten its grip.

Simon Walton

Paul Watson wrote: Correct me if I am wrong but then why don't you pay more and go to a private/non-NHS hospital? Because I'm a hypocrite. :-D Paul Watson wrote: I often hear reports on how the government over there is planning to re-vamp NHS and make it better and pump more money in and etc. blah etc. Maybe it needs to fail completely before anything is done. £96 billion to be precise. Most of that will go towards new curtains for every ward, a widescreen plasma TV in the important people's office, and solid gold circumcision knifes. In other words, unless some sort of strategy is devised to tell the hosptials how to spend it, it's pointless.

Simon Walton
Sonork: 10024

P

Simon Walton

Like it or not, he made some very valid arguments.

Simon Walton
Sonork: 10024

P

Paul Watson

Simon Walton wrote: Because I'm a hypocrite :laugh: Good of you to be honest about it! They say "Practice what you preach" but then you realise you will have no fun practicing if you have to do that. :rolleyes:

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

benjymous wrote: Saddam Dubbuyuh Hussain?

Chris Austin

Can someone pleas tell me why "Hunting With Dogs" is an issue. Since I own 4 (+60lb) dogs I am very intrigued. Chris Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.

Lost User

Look here[^] Mike Mullikin :beer:

Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. - David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

Chris Austin

Many Thanks Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.

David Wulff

As pointed out, this refers to pack hunting, i.e. fox or stag hunting. It's just another waste of public time and money to please the inner-city "I've only been to the countryside for a picnic" minority who obviously have our best interests at heart but have no idea how the countryside functions and the disasterous effects a ban on hunting with dogs will have on some communities. Sad, but the countryside will always been walked all over by the city folk. Next on the books after this ban (if it is banned, that is not 100% definate yet) will be fishing for sport, and after that it will be illegal to keep pets. Talking of the latter actually, the RSPCA is trying to get an animal protection law passed at the moment that will prevent you from owning a rabbit as a pet. Instead you must have a minimum of three so they don't get lonely. Now whilst I can see the basic logic behind this, it is going to lead to the unecessary deaths of thousands and thousands of pet rabbits to avoid prosecution. As always it is the moral minority fecking things up for the immoral majority.

David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk

"Life, as well as software, has bugs." - Roger Wright

Megan Forbes

I read in Computer Weekly a couple of weeks ago that the NHS is spending £91 million on a custom Hotmail / MSN Messenger system that is being developed for them - by a US firm. Firstly I'm sure they could have bought it from Yahoo or MS or whoever for much less, and secondly, if you are going to be stupid and pay to reinvent the wheel, they could at least keep the cash in the UK and pay a local company to do it.

Ooh, haven't been in a sig for ages :-D - Benjymous

Chris Austin

David Wulff wrote: Next on the books after this ban (if it is banned, that is not 100% definate yet) will be fishing for sport, and after that it will be illegal to keep pets. Being a pet lover I find this scarry and I am sure there is a certain bit of scarism here. Still, what kid of jackass would want to ban pets? Wouldn't that mean the end of entire breeds of domestic animals? As far as the rabbits go, I can see it now... a plague of rabbits running down the streets and in the subways after everyone lets theirs go to avoid trouble with the authorities. Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.

Lost User

I live in the country and I want to see an end to fox-hunting ASAP. It is a myth that people who live in the country are opposed to a ban and it annoys me when people try to make this "city vs town" analogy on this issue. It's bullshit. The only reason this vile practice hasn't gone the same way as badger-baiting and cock-fighting is because it is a practice partaken by the upper-classes. It's a class issue - else it wouldn't be an issue at all. Drag hunting will ensure that and job losses are kept to a minimum, so I don't see the argument. Hunting was banned during the foot and mouth epidemic - did we see tens of thousands of people out of work because of it? No. It's all bullsh*t. Quite frankly, anyone that gets pleasure from seeing a fox torn to pieces by a pack of dogs needs their f*cking head examinded. Now, coming from the country, I also know that foxes can be a pain in the arse, and in some cases need to be put down. This can be done more humanely than chasing the bloody thing with a pack of dogs. Perhaps the most montrous act that some hunts partake in is BREEDING FOXES so they can be hunted, which blows a large f*cking hole in the "pest control" argument. And the last time I checked, the majority of people in the UK disagree with fox-hunting. Moral minority my hairy nads! However, I also realise that some people see a ban on hunting with dogs as the thin end of the wedge, and next, as you suggest, it will be shooting birds (no fan of that either personally), fishing and keeping some pets. I share the concerns of these people, but the ban on hunting with dogs was a New Labout manifesto committment back in 1997 and it MUST be passed. People can argue the toss about it being a waste of parlimentary time, etc. - but this is a red herring. If the boot was on the other foot - let's say hunting was already banned and the government were going to pass a bill to reintroduce it - these very same people would be screaming for as much Commons time to get the law changed as possible. Rant over. For now.

When I am king, you will be first against the wall.

David Wulff

Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: It is a myth that people who live in the country are opposed to a ban and it annoys me when people try to make this "city vs town" analogy on this issue. You are stetching a handkerchief over a swimmingpool, and my strongly worded response above probably didn't help with that (:-O), but the views are very real. I have seen it time and time again with my very eyes. I used to live in a village pub and hear big city goes talking for hours about how uncivilised these country people are with their hunting and their outside toilets. It's a prejudiced stereotype that has not gone away. Of course I did not mean to imply that *all* country folk are against hunting with dogs (lets not forget this is not about fox hunting per se, but the whole sport of pack hunting) - I myself believe it to be a horrible, barabaric sport, as you yourself appear to. But - and there is always a but - I have been given the opportunity of living in a community where I could see that pack hunting is not about the hunting, it's not about the doigs, it's not even about the fox/stag/whatever at the end of it - it's about the community behind it. It brings with it a whole new perspective on what a community should mean to itself - something which I have yet to see in any of the towns or cities I have before or since lived in myself. That is why I do not want to see it banned by law - if people feel they have an objection to make then make it in the village halls to the farmers, huntsment and village people, not to suits in Westminster that think a fox is a type of wild cat and a stag is baby cow. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: This can be done more humanely than chasing the bloody thing with a pack of dogs. Pack hunting by and large is very very humane. The percentage of times the targetted animal dies in undue pain (i.e. anything other than short and sweet like a bullet to the chest) is small compared to the isntant deaths many demise to. Remember, they hunt with trained dogs not wild ones, much like a shooting dog, and theie natural instinct to terminate the prey effectively is selectively bred. They do not kill like bees around a hornet. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Perhaps the most montrous act that some hunts partake in is BREEDING FOXES so they can be hunted, which blows a large f*cking hole in the "pest control" argument. Pest control is a valid reason in many cases - these animals (deer, foxes, e