PDA

View Full Version : The things you come across on Usenet (cats)


Baldoni
July 7th 07, 01:36 PM
I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/

Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !

--
Count Baldoni

sheelagh
July 7th 07, 01:58 PM
On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> --
> Count Baldoni

Yeah, Right!!
Yes, I live in the Uk, & I have never heard such tripe in my entire
life!

Not in a million lifetimes would I agree with that or comply with it
either.
Less that 9 months ago, I had to trap a feral kitty who had a collar
that was so small that it was covered by skin where it was growing
over the collar...

It was postulated, had a dreadful abscess that required draining &
treating with antibiotics for a several weeks. Perhaps I should send
them the vets report that described the incident as sheer luck that
the animal didn't asphyxiate?

I understand the reasons behind the proposal, but it just is not
practical..

<Vent over!!>

Sheelagh

Ivor Jones
July 7th 07, 05:38 PM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
message
> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
> in trees !

What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.

As to being spied on, that's more true than anywhere else. There are more
CCTV cameras per head of population in the UK than anywhere else in the
world.

George Orwell had it almost right, he just got the year wrong.


Ivor

Professor
July 7th 07, 05:46 PM
"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
> message
>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>> in trees !
>
> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
> right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.

You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?

Ted Davis
July 7th 07, 05:59 PM
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:36:54 +0100, Baldoni
> wrote:

>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.

That used to be my position ... until I got three that I can't tell
apart, and apart form a fourth, at any distance without color-coded
collars. I use 1/2 inch elastic with the ends stapled together and
colored with permanent markers. The two that are most similar lose
them frequently, so something cheap is necessary.

--
T.E.D. ) Remove "gearbox.maem" to get real address - that one is dead

Baldoni
July 7th 07, 07:14 PM
Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>> message
>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>> in trees !
>>
>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
>> right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>
> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?

Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody
likes having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it
is quite normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross
it.

I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in
a lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but
that is a big help to stop them roaming.

It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep
them indoors all the time.

--
Count Baldoni

Little Hawk
July 7th 07, 07:33 PM
Baldoni <baldoniXXV wrote:
> Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>> message
>>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>
>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>
>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>>> in trees !
>>>
>>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have
>>> the right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>>
>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
>> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>
> Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody
> likes having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it is
> quite normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross it.
>
> I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in
> a lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but
> that is a big help to stop them roaming.
>
> It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
> they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
> incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep them
> indoors all the time.
>

getting your pet fixed will stop the roaming. missy is fixed, she's
happy just laying by the open patio door. missy will venture out from
time to time but shes never very far from home.

to argue about letting a cat out or not, lock yourself up in your house
for a week and watch the world go by through a window.

Ivor Jones
July 7th 07, 09:18 PM
"Professor" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
> > message
> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
> > >
> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
> > >
> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
> >
> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
> > may it remain so.
>
> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
> as a bit "thick", right?

Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.

What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
we've had this "discussion" before.

Ivor

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:27 PM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
>
Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure they
have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has better
things to do....GB is no exception.........

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:32 PM
"sheelagh" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>
> Yeah, Right!!
> Yes, I live in the Uk, & I have never heard such tripe in my entire
> life!
>
> Not in a million lifetimes would I agree with that or comply with it
> either.
> Less that 9 months ago, I had to trap a feral kitty who had a collar
> that was so small that it was covered by skin where it was growing
> over the collar...
>
> It was postulated, had a dreadful abscess that required draining &
> treating with antibiotics for a several weeks. Perhaps I should send
> them the vets report that described the incident as sheer luck that
> the animal didn't asphyxiate?
>
> I understand the reasons behind the proposal, but it just is not
> practical..
>
> <Vent over!!>
>
> Sheelagh
>
It is the responsibility, not the right, of good men to break bad laws. -
Spencer Tracy in "Judgment at Nuremberg"

It is hard for me to think of a law that would be better broken than a
cat collar law, or a cat leash law. People who love unenforceable laws, and
tax laws are called, "Liberals".

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:34 PM
"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
> message
>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>> in trees !
>
> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
> right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>
> As to being spied on, that's more true than anywhere else. There are more
> CCTV cameras per head of population in the UK than anywhere else in the
> world.
>
> George Orwell had it almost right, he just got the year wrong.
>
>
> Ivor
>
>
When Adlai Stevenson was a NYC judge, he wrote a beautiful paragraph in a
decision to disallow a cat leash law....I wish I could find it, but I
haven't been able to.

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:38 PM
"Professor" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>> message
>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>> in trees !
>>
>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
>> right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>
> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>
You probably have him mixed up with me. - I am the one who "likes having
cats run over by cars". (in your simpleton's mind.)
The only real difference is that I know that it isn't the cats
fault....When cats are run down by cars, I know that the fault belongs to
the cars, and not the cats.

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:41 PM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
> Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>> message
>>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>
>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>
>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>>> in trees !
>>>
>>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have the
>>> right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>>
>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
>> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>
> Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody likes
> having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it is quite
> normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross it.
>
> I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in a
> lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but that
> is a big help to stop them roaming.
>
> It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
> they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
> incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep them
> indoors all the time.
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
>
The residential speed limit here is 25 mph. If people obeyed it, the number
of cats that are run down would drop to almost nothing. The reason most cats
are run down by cars is because of teenage-minded people who drive their two
ton SUV's at 40 mph plus in residential areas.

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:45 PM
"Little Hawk" > wrote in message
news:C%[email protected]
> Baldoni <baldoniXXV wrote:
>> Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>>>> in trees !
>>>>
>>>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have
>>>> the right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>>>
>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
>>> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>>
>> Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody
>> likes having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it is
>> quite normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross it.
>>
>> I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in a
>> lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but
>> that is a big help to stop them roaming.
>>
>> It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
>> they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
>> incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep them
>> indoors all the time.
>>
>
> getting your pet fixed will stop the roaming. missy is fixed, she's happy
> just laying by the open patio door. missy will venture out from time to
> time but shes never very far from home.
>
> to argue about letting a cat out or not, lock yourself up in your house
> for a week and watch the world go by through a window.

This is true.....My "fixed" cats seldom venture off the property line. It is
only the unfixed male feral cat that travels, and he only goes a block and a
half away.....I do expect him to get run down one of these days, however.
But he is already over 6 years old, so he has outlived most feral cats
already.

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:52 PM
"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Professor" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>> > message
>> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>> > >
>> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>> > >
>> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>> >
>> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
>> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
>> > may it remain so.
>>
>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
>> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
>> as a bit "thick", right?
>
> Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
> 52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
> a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>
> What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
> we've had this "discussion" before.
>
> Ivor
>
>

Yes. It is a peculiarly liberal position. (keeping cats locked up indoors to
preserve their life) Liberals think that living a long life trumps
everything else....They love what I call, "padded cell laws", that have the
preservation of life their prime purpose. Motorcycle helmet laws are a prime
example.....And seat belt laws, too. Their argument is that my life doesn't
belong to me, but to the state.....They would like everything to, "belong to
the state". I would like to grab them by the collar, and shake them and say,
"Everybody, and everything dies sooner or later. Some of us just want to
enjoy the few years we have here while we are still alive. Now, why don't
you want to give us that right?"

William Graham
July 7th 07, 11:54 PM
"Ted Davis" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:36:54 +0100, Baldoni
> > wrote:
>
>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> That used to be my position ... until I got three that I can't tell
> apart, and apart form a fourth, at any distance without color-coded
> collars. I use 1/2 inch elastic with the ends stapled together and
> colored with permanent markers. The two that are most similar lose
> them frequently, so something cheap is necessary.
>
They make "break-free" collars that will separate if the cat catches it on a
fence or something. I use these....The only cat I have that can't keep one
on is the feral cat.....He loses his after only a few days.

Ted Davis
July 8th 07, 12:21 AM
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 15:54:55 -0700, "William Graham" >
wrote:

>They make "break-free" collars that will separate if the cat catches it on a
>fence or something. I use these....The only cat I have that can't keep one
>on is the feral cat.....He loses his after only a few days.
>
I can buy a *lot* on elastic and markers for what *one* commercial
breakaway collar costs. They lose about one a month.

--
T.E.D. ) Remove "gearbox.maem" to get real address - that one is dead

Baldoni
July 8th 07, 12:45 AM
on 07/07/2007, William Graham supposed :
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> -- Count Baldoni
>>
>>
> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure they
> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has better
> things to do....GB is no exception.........

I have always wished that Switzerland would invade but it ain't going
to happen.

The authorities are looking in peoples refuse bins to check there are
no items that should be re-cycled in there.

For all the camera's they can't police the streets properly never mind
spy on cats doing their business in the vegetable plots and borders.

Mark my words there will be some act or law within the European Courts
that will give the cat its basic right to go to toilet in privacy.

--
Count Baldoni

William Graham
July 8th 07, 12:50 AM
"Ted Davis" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 15:54:55 -0700, "William Graham" >
> wrote:
>
>>They make "break-free" collars that will separate if the cat catches it on
>>a
>>fence or something. I use these....The only cat I have that can't keep one
>>on is the feral cat.....He loses his after only a few days.
>>
> I can buy a *lot* on elastic and markers for what *one* commercial
> breakaway collar costs. They lose about one a month.
>
Yeah....If I wanted to keep using collars on the feral male, I would
probably use an elastic band, but the breakaway collar I did use did it's
job....The other family in the neighborhood that was feeding him telephoned
me, so I know who they are, and where he was going. (they have a hot tub, so
he liked to sleep there on its cover) Now, it doesn't make any difference,
so he goes collarless......

William Graham
July 8th 07, 12:54 AM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
> on 07/07/2007, William Graham supposed :
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>> ...
>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> -- Count Baldoni
>>>
>>>
>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>
> I have always wished that Switzerland would invade but it ain't going to
> happen.
>
> The authorities are looking in peoples refuse bins to check there are no
> items that should be re-cycled in there.
>
> For all the camera's they can't police the streets properly never mind spy
> on cats doing their business in the vegetable plots and borders.
>
> Mark my words there will be some act or law within the European Courts
> that will give the cat its basic right to go to toilet in privacy.
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
>
Sounds like you guys are suffering from, "liberalmania". I know that we are
suffering from it here, but our case hasn't progressed quite as far as
yours......:^) I do keep a sharp eye on what happens over there so I'll know
the prognosis of the disease......

chalk
July 8th 07, 01:58 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "sheelagh" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Count Baldoni
>>
>> Yeah, Right!!
>> Yes, I live in the Uk, & I have never heard such tripe in my entire
>> life!
>>
>> Not in a million lifetimes would I agree with that or comply with it
>> either.
>> Less that 9 months ago, I had to trap a feral kitty who had a collar
>> that was so small that it was covered by skin where it was growing
>> over the collar...
>>
>> It was postulated, had a dreadful abscess that required draining &
>> treating with antibiotics for a several weeks. Perhaps I should send
>> them the vets report that described the incident as sheer luck that
>> the animal didn't asphyxiate?
>>
>> I understand the reasons behind the proposal, but it just is not
>> practical..
>>
>> <Vent over!!>
>>
>> Sheelagh
>>
> It is the responsibility, not the right, of good men to break bad laws. -
> Spencer Tracy in "Judgment at Nuremberg"
>
> It is hard for me to think of a law that would be better broken than a
> cat collar law, or a cat leash law. People who love unenforceable laws,
> and tax laws are called, "Liberals".


"Liberalism is a mental disorder"
Dr Michael Savage
The Savage Nation

chalk
July 8th 07, 02:02 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>> Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>>>> in trees !
>>>>
>>>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have
>>>> the right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>>>
>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
>>> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>>
>> Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody
>> likes having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it is
>> quite normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross it.
>>
>> I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in a
>> lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but
>> that is a big help to stop them roaming.
>>
>> It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
>> they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
>> incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep them
>> indoors all the time.
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>>
>>
> The residential speed limit here is 25 mph. If people obeyed it, the
> number of cats that are run down would drop to almost nothing. The reason
> most cats are run down by cars is because of teenage-minded people who
> drive their two ton SUV's at 40 mph plus in residential areas.


The "me" generation will drive anywhere anyway anytime they please, a result
of over 40 years of liberal left politically correct thinking in America.

chalk
July 8th 07, 02:06 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> "Professor" > wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >
>>> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>> > message
>>> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>> > >
>>> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>> > >
>>> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>> >
>>> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
>>> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
>>> > may it remain so.
>>>
>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
>>> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
>>> as a bit "thick", right?
>>
>> Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
>> 52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
>> a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>>
>> What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
>> we've had this "discussion" before.
>>
>> Ivor
>>
>>
>
> Yes. It is a peculiarly liberal position. (keeping cats locked up indoors
> to preserve their life) Liberals think that living a long life trumps
> everything else....They love what I call, "padded cell laws", that have
> the preservation of life their prime purpose. Motorcycle helmet laws are a
> prime example.....And seat belt laws, too. Their argument is that my life
> doesn't belong to me, but to the state.....They would like everything to,
> "belong to the state". I would like to grab them by the collar, and shake
> them and say, "Everybody, and everything dies sooner or later. Some of us
> just want to enjoy the few years we have here while we are still alive.
> Now, why don't you want to give us that right?"


Liberal leftists worship the state, government, more government, and
bigger government and higher taxes to support even more and
bigger government. "Hello, I'm from the government, and I am here
to help you."

chalk
July 8th 07, 02:10 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>>
>>
> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
> better things to do....GB is no exception.........


Think of all the employees on the government payroll that it takes to
enforce
such nonsense. Why do you think the elitist liberal Al Gore dreamed up
the Junk Science of "Global Warming"?

chalk
July 8th 07, 02:13 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>> on 07/07/2007, William Graham supposed :
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>
>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>
>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>>
>>>> -- Count Baldoni
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>
>> I have always wished that Switzerland would invade but it ain't going to
>> happen.
>>
>> The authorities are looking in peoples refuse bins to check there are no
>> items that should be re-cycled in there.
>>
>> For all the camera's they can't police the streets properly never mind
>> spy on cats doing their business in the vegetable plots and borders.
>>
>> Mark my words there will be some act or law within the European Courts
>> that will give the cat its basic right to go to toilet in privacy.
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>>
>>
> Sounds like you guys are suffering from, "liberalmania". I know that we
> are suffering from it here, but our case hasn't progressed quite as far as
> yours......:^) I do keep a sharp eye on what happens over there so I'll
> know the prognosis of the disease......


George Sorros & Co. have a dream to turn America into the
same secular liberal mess that Europe is in, a place where animals have
more rights than a human being.

bookie
July 8th 07, 02:48 AM
On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> --
> Count Baldoni

what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.

it won't go through anyway, and the concept behind it woudl contradict
the ruling that a cat 'owner' cannot be held responsible for the
actions of said cat if it enters a neighbours property and/or damages
that property as the cat is a semi-wild creature which cannot be
controlled inthe same manner as a dog can. If this is accepted then
the proposal that cats must wear collars on order for the owners to
control their behaviour is absurd.

for the reasons I ahve put above and those stated by sheelagh i abhor
collars on cats and i will never put one on a cat who lives with me

bookie

Professor
July 8th 07, 03:26 AM
"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
> "Professor" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>> > message
>> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>> >
>> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
>> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
>> > may it remain so.
>>
>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
>> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
>> as a bit "thick", right?
>
> Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
> 52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
> a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>
> What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
> we've had this "discussion" before.
>
> Ivor

I.E. Yes, you are a bit thick. Thousands of cats are killed on England's
motorways yearly, but you don't seem to give a toss. I can't fathom how
keeping cats safe indoors is somehow against their better interests. Does
dementia run in your family?

bookie
July 8th 07, 01:25 PM
On 8 Jul, 03:26, "Professor" > wrote:
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Professor" > wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
> >> > o
> >> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
> >> > >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
> >> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
> >> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> >> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
> >> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
> >> > may it remain so.
>
> >> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
> >> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
> >> as a bit "thick", right?
>
> > Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
> > 52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
> > a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>
> > What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
> > we've had this "discussion" before.
>
> > Ivor
>
> I.E. Yes, you are a bit thick. Thousands of cats are killed on England's
> motorways yearly, but you don't seem to give a toss. I can't fathom how
> keeping cats safe indoors is somehow against their better interests. Does
> dementia run in your family?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

because keeping them captive indoors is against their nature you dumbo

bookie
July 8th 07, 01:29 PM
On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>
> ...>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> > --
> > Count Baldoni
>
> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure they
> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has better
> things to do....GB is no exception.........

believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this

sheelagh
July 8th 07, 04:17 PM
On 8 Jul, 02:48, bookie > wrote:
> On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>
> > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> > --
> > Count Baldoni
>
> what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
> think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
> that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
> 'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
> it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.
>
> it won't go through anyway, and the concept behind it woudl contradict
> the ruling that a cat 'owner' cannot be held responsible for the
> actions of said cat if it enters a neighbours property and/or damages
> that property as the cat is a semi-wild creature which cannot be
> controlled inthe same manner as a dog can. If this is accepted then
> the proposal that cats must wear collars on order for the owners to
> control their behaviour is absurd.
>
> for the reasons I ahve put above and those stated by sheelagh i abhor
> collars on cats and i will never put one on a cat who lives with me
>
> bookie


Here, Here.

There is nothing like watching a vet with a scalpel trying to separate
a collar from the cats neck, because it was leather, too small & the
cats flesh growing over it. Asphyxia is a terrible way to die, & would
most certainly happened to Lucy(fur!) had it now been removed when it
was. Having said that, what I should have said was, either die from
the infection the ill fitting collar caused, or asphyxiated!!

Whilst I understand reasons stated for a cat being allowed to wear a
collar, I don't necessarily agree with them. If you have an indoor
cat, why would your cat need a collar? And, If you allow your cat out,
then why not chip your cat instead. It is easily defined when read by
a chip reader.

The argument about hunting birds is moot. Cats hunt. It is in their
instinct to hunt, & I honestly don't think that it would make any
difference to birds, unless every single cat were made to wear
them..which in itself is unworkable because cats are abandoned, not
cared for by some owners. Also, who would take the responsibility for
the feral cat population? Unless the powers that be, decided to have a
mass cull which would cause a public uproar. For the reasons I have
outlined I see this as unworkable & unfeasible too


Whatever anyone says about using safety collars, really does need to
see the consequences of what a collar can do to a cat or kitten,
before making a judgment on whether it is the right thing to do, or
not as the case might be. If one were to argue that it marks ownership
& The address of whom the cat belongs to- Chip your cat. Simple
really!

I think that I could agree to chipping a cat, however, culpability for
the cats actions is another issue entirely. You can't possibly make he
owner responsible for the cats actions. As stated, it is a semi wild
creature.
The next thing we will hear is that there is going to be a Hedge Hog
tax. utterly ridiculous!!
Sheelagh

Matthew
July 8th 07, 05:34 PM
Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.

Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.

Mr Tanaka
July 8th 07, 05:57 PM
Matthew put a quarter in the slot and goes:
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.

<floor opens up, matt drops through, floor closes back>

sheelagh
July 8th 07, 06:07 PM
On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.


You all ended up
> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.

A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
Sheelagh

Matthew
July 8th 07, 06:15 PM
"sheelagh" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>> of
>> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
>> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>
>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you
>> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
>> never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
>> threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
>> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
>
> You all ended up
>> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> Sheelagh
>

Only thing that I could come up with that could describe them ;-)

Matthew
July 8th 07, 06:17 PM
"sheelagh" > >

Specially Barry

chalk
July 8th 07, 07:44 PM
"bookie" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>
>> ...>I would never let any of
>> my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> > --
>> > Count Baldoni
>>
>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>> they
>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
>> better
>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>
> believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
> it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
> the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
> us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>


Americans should be paying attention, but we are not. The
North American Union (NAU) is just around the corner. NAU
is *not* Republican or Democrat. Political elites from both sides
of the political spectrum support forming the NAU. Bush and
Hillary both support formation of the NAU. It was common
Americans who recently fought down the latest immigration bill.
Political elites from *both* parties support amnesty for the
20 million (and growing) illegal Mexican immigrants now in the
United States. Formation of the NAU will make them all *legal*
citizens of the NAU overnight. Hablo Espanol?

chalk
July 8th 07, 07:48 PM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.


Free, Open, and Robust discussion is the basis of a free society.
Why do you think the neo-liberal fascists want to shut down talk
radio in the United States?

Global warming My Ass! More like Junk Science.

Mr Tanaka
July 8th 07, 08:14 PM
On Jul 8, 5:17 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "sheelagh" > >
>
> Specially Barry

what's that Matt? lmao
dude, you don't even have a leg to stand on

would be a big shame getting caught cruising wouldn't it?
what about Marcie next door, I heard she's got a little kit with WHIPS
in it

just put the safari hat away, go find something good on the tube,
Paris Trout, (Dennis Hopper) is sexually abusing a brunette on cable
tv. The movie takes place back in the sweaty days.

sheelagh
July 8th 07, 08:20 PM
On 8 Jul, 19:21, Anne Jackson > wrote:
> The message from sheelagh > contains these
> words:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
> > > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again.
> > > And all of
> > > you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> > > this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view
> > > point you
> > > will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> > > never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> > > threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
> > You all ended up
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
> > A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> > Sheelagh
>
> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from uk.rec.gardening!
>
> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>
> --
> AnneJ
>
> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

LOL.
I thought being the plural, they would?
But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
say!!
sorry!
Sheelagh :o)

bookie
July 8th 07, 08:20 PM
On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.

i didn't say a word about that! just about putting collars on cats,
which i am opposed to fro several reasons, but i am sure someone will
argue against me about it.
i can't be arsed with getting into that tedious debate again; I am
never going to change your mind and you are never to change mine no
matter much we rant on, so we have to agree to disagree.

i wish my jessie's cat bed was big enough for me to climb into with
her and snuggle up, or mayeb that I was small enough to get in there
with her. she is lovely and I love her btw, did I ever tell you all
that?
bookie

bookie
July 8th 07, 08:26 PM
On 8 Jul, 18:07, sheelagh > wrote:
> On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
> > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> > you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> > this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> > will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> > never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> > threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> You all ended up
>
> > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> Sheelagh

actually that should be ******* not tosser's, the former is the plural
form of the singular 'tosser' and the other is talking about something
or someone who belongs to a tosser or that the tosser is doing ie the
tosser's going on about cats again, or the tosser's pants are on fire.
lots of people get the position of the apostrophe incorrect and end up
writing something completely different from what they meant to write.
bit like the there/their/they're thing which i explained before when
get them mixed up all the time

personally for this scenario i would choose the term '******s' '****s'
'a-holes' or 'prats', maybe even 'plonkers', they are all
interchangeable

bookie

bookie
July 8th 07, 08:29 PM
On 8 Jul, 19:48, "chalk" > wrote:
> "Matthew" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
> > of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
> > do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
> > you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
> > will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
> > past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
> > up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> Free, Open, and Robust discussion is the basis of a free society.
> Why do you think the neo-liberal fascists want to shut down talk
> radio in the United States?
>
> Global warming My Ass! More like Junk Science.

nothing wrong with it, just that we ahve all been there with the 'cats
in or out' debate and are all fairly bored of it now. if a new bunch
of people want to go at it while the rest fo us look in, thats fine. i
just think that noone from the last string abot this one shoud be
allowed to post on it, only new people, as the oldies would have an
unfair advantage of experience or something from the last bit of argy-
bargy

bookie
July 8th 07, 08:31 PM
On 8 Jul, 20:26, bookie > wrote:
> On 8 Jul, 18:07, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
> > > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> > > you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> > > this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> > > will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> > > never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> > > threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > You all ended up
>
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> > Sheelagh
>
> actually that should be ******* not tosser's, the former is the plural
> form of the singular 'tosser' and the other is talking about something
> or someone who belongs to a tosser or that the tosser is doing ie the
> tosser's going on about cats again, or the tosser's pants are on fire.
> lots of people get the position of the apostrophe incorrect and end up
> writing something completely different from what they meant to write.
> bit like the there/their/they're thing which i explained before when
> get them mixed up all the time
>
> personally for this scenario i would choose the term '******s' '****s'
> 'a-holes' or 'prats', maybe even 'plonkers', they are all
> interchangeable
>
> bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

oh ******** i meant to reply only to sheelagh not the whole group,
what an idiot.

now for all those who are unfamiliar with the term 'plomker' then that
is what i am being right now.

sorry

it 's been a long day

Charlie Wilkes
July 8th 07, 08:53 PM
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:20:42 -0700, bookie wrote:

>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all
>> ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> i didn't say a word about that! just about putting collars on cats,
> which i am opposed to fro several reasons, but i am sure someone will
> argue against me about it.
> i can't be arsed with getting into that tedious debate again; I am never
> going to change your mind and you are never to change mine no matter
> much we rant on, so we have to agree to disagree.

Bookie, you goddamn liar, you posted about this less than 8 hours ago...

"keeping them captive indoors is against their nature you dumbo"

Message-ID: om>

You are an outdoor cat militant. I only hope your cats don't have to pay
the ultimate price for your wrong-headed view of this subject.

Charlie

bookie
July 8th 07, 10:28 PM
On 8 Jul, 20:53, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:20:42 -0700, bookie wrote:
> >> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
> >> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
> >> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
> >> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all
> >> ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > i didn't say a word about that! just about putting collars on cats,
> > which i am opposed to fro several reasons, but i am sure someone will
> > argue against me about it.
> > i can't be arsed with getting into that tedious debate again; I am never
> > going to change your mind and you are never to change mine no matter
> > much we rant on, so we have to agree to disagree.
>
> Bookie, you goddamn liar, you posted about this less than 8 hours ago...
>
> "keeping them captive indoors is against their nature you dumbo"
>
> Message-ID: om>
>
> You are an outdoor cat militant. I only hope your cats don't have to pay
> the ultimate price for your wrong-headed view of this subject.
>
> Charlie

you m,ake it sound like I make them live outdoors with no access to
the indoors, totally incorrect, i just give them the choice and I
leave the back door open whenever i am in.mostly they stay indoors
where the soft cushions and the food is, sometimes they go to sunbathe
outside and to check out their territory (our tiny back garden) but i
like to give them the choice.
i would rather they were able to go outside and exoperience a bit of
nature than go stir crazy indoors.

Baldoni
July 8th 07, 10:47 PM
Professor used his keyboard to write :
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Professor" > wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>> > message
>>> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>> >
>>> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
>>> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
>>> > may it remain so.
>>>
>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
>>> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
>>> as a bit "thick", right?
>>
>> Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm 52)
>> and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as a
>> result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>>
>> What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
>> we've had this "discussion" before.
>>
>> Ivor
>
> I.E. Yes, you are a bit thick. Thousands of cats are killed on England's
> motorways yearly, but you don't seem to give a toss. I can't fathom how
> keeping cats safe indoors is somehow against their better interests. Does
> dementia run in your family?

I have never seen a cat on a motorway in my life, and I have spent a
lot of time driving on them.

They are too damn noisy for one thing.

--
Count Baldoni

Matthew
July 8th 07, 11:40 PM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matthew" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
>> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>
>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
>> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
>
> Free, Open, and Robust discussion is the basis of a free society.
> Why do you think the neo-liberal fascists want to shut down talk
> radio in the United States?
>
> Global warming My Ass! More like Junk Science.
>
>

Someone needs their meds refilled

Matthew
July 8th 07, 11:41 PM
"Mr Tanaka" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> On Jul 8, 5:17 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:
>> "sheelagh" > >
>>
>> Specially Barry
>
> what's that Matt? lmao
> dude, you don't even have a leg to stand on
>
> would be a big shame getting caught cruising wouldn't it?
> what about Marcie next door, I heard she's got a little kit with WHIPS
> in it
>
> just put the safari hat away, go find something good on the tube,
> Paris Trout, (Dennis Hopper) is sexually abusing a brunette on cable
> tv. The movie takes place back in the sweaty days.
>

Dude you must be on some good stuff to come up with that bunch of mumble
jumble

Stacey Weinberger
July 9th 07, 12:04 AM
>> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from uk.rec.gardening!
>>
>> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>>
>> --
>> AnneJ
>>
>> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
>> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
>> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> LOL.
> I thought being the plural, they would?
> But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
> you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
> say!!
> sorry!
> Sheelagh :o)

Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of that
lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The apostrophe
denotes possession or a contraction.

Stacey

chalk
July 9th 07, 12:59 AM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> "chalk" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Matthew" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep
>>> your cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again.
>>> And all of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic
>>> that you all do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even
>>> worse.
>>>
>>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all
>>> ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>>
>>
>> Free, Open, and Robust discussion is the basis of a free society.
>> Why do you think the neo-liberal fascists want to shut down talk
>> radio in the United States?
>>
>> Global warming My Ass! More like Junk Science.
>>
>>
>
> Someone needs their meds refilled



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:04 AM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Professor explained on 07/07/2007 :
>>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>>>> message
>>>>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>>>>> upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's
>>>>>> in trees !
>>>>>
>>>>> What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the UK they have
>>>>> the right to roam where they please, long may it remain so.
>>>>
>>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run over by cars.
>>>> In British-ese they refer to guys like you as a bit "thick", right?
>>>
>>> Nobody likes having there cats run over by cars. The same as nobody
>>> likes having their dogs run over by cars. In some parts of the UK it is
>>> quite normal for sheep to roam along the side of the road and cross it.
>>>
>>> I picked a cat up last year that had been run over and the owner was in
>>> a lot of distress. I did not check to see if he had been castrated but
>>> that is a big help to stop them roaming.
>>>
>>> It is something that can be argued about all week but when cats decided
>>> they were going to hang out with humans I doubt they were hoping to be
>>> incarcerated. A lot of people would argue that it is cruel to keep them
>>> indoors all the time.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Count Baldoni
>>>
>>>
>> The residential speed limit here is 25 mph. If people obeyed it, the
>> number of cats that are run down would drop to almost nothing. The reason
>> most cats are run down by cars is because of teenage-minded people who
>> drive their two ton SUV's at 40 mph plus in residential areas.
>
>
> The "me" generation will drive anywhere anyway anytime they please, a
> result
> of over 40 years of liberal left politically correct thinking in America.
>
>
>
Well, I wouldn't blame speeding on the liberals, although their predilection
to make unenforceable laws breeds disrespect for the law, which does lead to
disobeying the rules of the road among other things........I prefer a
society with just a few well enforced laws.

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:13 AM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>> ...
>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Count Baldoni
>>>
>>>
>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>
>
> Think of all the employees on the government payroll that it takes to
> enforce
> such nonsense. Why do you think the elitist liberal Al Gore dreamed up
> the Junk Science of "Global Warming"?
>
These are, "limousine liberals", like Barbara Streisand, Brad Pitt and
Angelina Jolie......They are always looking down on people who shop at
Wall-Mart. (They can afford to buy their veggies at Tiffanies) Or, as G.
Gordon Libby says, they want to save all the poor, downtrodden people of the
world using my money to do it with........I call them Robin-hooders. They
never saw a tax they didn't love, and they want to steal my money and give
it to the poor. They assume everyone who is rich got their money as easily
as they got theirs.....It never occurs to them that some of us worked and
saved for 40 years in order to get enough money to retire on..........And we
didn't get it by climbing up the backs of the poor.

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:20 AM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>> ...
>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Count Baldoni
>>>
>>>
>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>
>
> Think of all the employees on the government payroll that it takes to
> enforce
> such nonsense. Why do you think the elitist liberal Al Gore dreamed up
> the Junk Science of "Global Warming"?
>
Yeah.....He's big on science, but he's never heard of the, Paleocene-Eocene
thermal maximum, that occurred some 55 million years ago....(Long before
there were any human beings on the earth, much less driving automobiles)

sheelagh
July 9th 07, 01:21 AM
On 8 Jul, 20:31, bookie > wrote:
> On 8 Jul, 20:26, bookie > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jul, 18:07, sheelagh > wrote:
>
> > > On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
> > > > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > > > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> > > > you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> > > > this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > > > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> > > > will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> > > > never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> > > > threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> > > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > > You all ended up
>
> > > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > > A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> > > Sheelagh
>
> > actually that should be ******* not tosser's, the former is the plural
> > form of the singular 'tosser' and the other is talking about something
> > or someone who belongs to a tosser or that the tosser is doing ie the
> > tosser's going on about cats again, or the tosser's pants are on fire.
> > lots of people get the position of the apostrophe incorrect and end up
> > writing something completely different from what they meant to write.
> > bit like the there/their/they're thing which i explained before when
> > get them mixed up all the time
>
> > personally for this scenario i would choose the term '******s' '****s'
> > 'a-holes' or 'prats', maybe even 'plonkers', they are all
> > interchangeable
>
> > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> oh ******** i meant to reply only to sheelagh not the whole group,
> what an idiot.
>
> now for all those who are unfamiliar with the term 'plomker' then that
> is what i am being right now.
>
> sorry
>
> it 's been a long day- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

> oh ******** i meant to reply only to sheelagh not the whole group,
> what an idiot.

No worries Bookie, lol.
I am not ashamed about being illiterate for the better part of 30
years.
It wasn't my choosing & to be perfectly honest, I'm quite proud of
myself actually. I got over that hang up a Long time ago ;o)

I don't mind people explaining where I have made an error, especially
if they correct me with constructive criticism, & also explain where I
went wrong & why too.
We all make mistakes.. Me more than most.

Anyway, how am I supposed to learn if people like you don't point out
these errors to me including how & where I went wrong? It all helps.
if you go back to my first post on here & compare it with today's
measly offerings, I think that you will note a marked
difference..well, I think so, put it that way....
the grammar is still in dire need of acute attention- But I get by.

Thanx,
Sheelagh

Mr Tanaka
July 9th 07, 01:31 AM
On Jul 8, 7:26 pm, bookie > wrote:
> On 8 Jul, 18:07, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jul, 17:34, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
> > > Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> > > cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> > > you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> > > this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> > > Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> > > will never change it. People here have a different view point you will
> > > never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past
> > > threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > You all ended up
>
> > > acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> > A bunch of tosser's Matthew;o)
> > Sheelagh
>
> actually that should be ******* not tosser's, the former is the plural
> form of the singular 'tosser' and the other is talking about something
> or someone who belongs to a tosser or that the tosser is doing ie the
> tosser's going on about cats again, or the tosser's pants are on fire.
> lots of people get the position of the apostrophe incorrect and end up
> writing something completely different from what they meant to write.
> bit like the there/their/they're thing which i explained before when
> get them mixed up all the time
>
> personally for this scenario i would choose the term '******s' '****s'
> 'a-holes' or 'prats', maybe even 'plonkers', they are all
> interchangeable
>
> bookie

It's fine, post it here and save sheelagh a step

Mr Tanaka
July 9th 07, 01:34 AM
On Jul 8, 11:59 pm, "chalk" > wrote:

> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

looks like dental work somehow and

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:44 AM
"Professor" > wrote in message
news:AXXji.3[email protected]
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Professor" > wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in
>>> > message
>>> > > I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>> > > http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>> > > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied
>>> > > upon by Govt agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>> >
>>> > What a load of crap. Cats are wild animals, here in the
>>> > UK they have the right to roam where they please, long
>>> > may it remain so.
>>>
>>> You never let us forget that you like having cats run
>>> over by cars. In British-ese they refer to guys like you
>>> as a bit "thick", right?
>>
>> Who said I like cats run over by cars..? I've had cats all my life (I'm
>> 52) and none of them have ever been run over, hit or otherwise injured as
>> a result of being outdoors. It all depends where you live.
>>
>> What I *don't* like is keeping a naturally outdoor animal a prisoner. But
>> we've had this "discussion" before.
>>
>> Ivor
>
> I.E. Yes, you are a bit thick. Thousands of cats are killed on England's
> motorways yearly, but you don't seem to give a toss. I can't fathom how
> keeping cats safe indoors is somehow against their better interests. Does
> dementia run in your family?
>
This depends entirely on the nature of the area where you live....Keeping my
four cats indoors would be just as ridiculous as you seem to think keeping
them outside is in your area....You have to learn to put yourself in the
shoes of other people. Not everyone lives in as heavily populated and
traveled area as you seem to live. I live on a dead end street that is
backed up by a Christmas tree farm that is over 40 acres large. The chances
of any of my cats getting run down by cars is virtually nil. On the other
hand, I used to live in an apartment in downtown San Francisco. I didn't
have a cat then, but if I had, I would have kept it inside, (which is
probably why I didn't have one)

My cousin used to live on a grape farm. She and her husband were half owners
of Souverign winery. She kept four "working cats". Their job was to keep
birds away from the grapes. She didn't feed them, but only gave them water
to drink....They were lean and mean, too.......

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:48 AM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message >
> I have never seen a cat on a motorway in my life, and I have spent a lot
> of time driving on them.
>
> They are too damn noisy for one thing.
>
Cats don't like motorways, but they sometimes have to cross them in order to
get where they are going....If the speed limit is 25 mph or less, the cats
seldom have any problem with this.....It's when the teenagers are doing 40
in a 25 zone that the problems occur. Cats can't conceive of anything that
goes that fast, and don't know how to avoid it......

William Graham
July 9th 07, 01:53 AM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "bookie" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
>> On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>>
>>> ...>I would never let any of
>>> my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> > --
>>> > Count Baldoni
>>>
>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>> they
>>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
>>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
>>> better
>>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>
>> believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
>> it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
>> the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
>> us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>>
>
>
> Americans should be paying attention, but we are not. The
> North American Union (NAU) is just around the corner. NAU
> is *not* Republican or Democrat. Political elites from both sides
> of the political spectrum support forming the NAU. Bush and
> Hillary both support formation of the NAU. It was common
> Americans who recently fought down the latest immigration bill.
> Political elites from *both* parties support amnesty for the
> 20 million (and growing) illegal Mexican immigrants now in the
> United States. Formation of the NAU will make them all *legal*
> citizens of the NAU overnight. Hablo Espanol?
>

3/4 of the American people don't want to give amnesty to the illegal
aliens....They want to build a wall on the border that keeps them out.
Letting them in is still against the law, and we don't want to change
that.....I think our leaders are finally getting that fact through their
thick heads. We don't want any new "softer" laws....We like the law we have
now, and we just want it enforced. There is a quota of aliens that we allow
to come here, and we just want the aliens to respect that number and come
here legally.

William Graham
July 9th 07, 02:01 AM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
It isn't a British/American thing....It's a city/residential/rural
thing....There are some places where you just can't keep cats outside, and
other places where it would be foolish to keep them inside. (see my post
above)

chalk
July 9th 07, 02:03 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "chalk" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>
>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>
>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Count Baldoni
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>
>>
>> Think of all the employees on the government payroll that it takes to
>> enforce
>> such nonsense. Why do you think the elitist liberal Al Gore dreamed up
>> the Junk Science of "Global Warming"?
>>
> These are, "limousine liberals", like Barbara Streisand, Brad Pitt and
> Angelina Jolie......They are always looking down on people who shop at
> Wall-Mart. (They can afford to buy their veggies at Tiffanies) Or, as G.
> Gordon Libby says, they want to save all the poor, downtrodden people of
> the world using my money to do it with........I call them Robin-hooders.
> They never saw a tax they didn't love, and they want to steal my money and
> give it to the poor. They assume everyone who is rich got their money as
> easily as they got theirs.....It never occurs to them that some of us
> worked and saved for 40 years in order to get enough money to retire
> on..........And we didn't get it by climbing up the backs of the poor.


John Edwards is conducting a presidential campaign that is driven by
"Two Americas," one rich & one poor. Of course, this is a classic
liberal Democrat campaign based on class warfare. The hypocrisy is
that Edwards routinely treats himself to $400 haircuts and owns
several mansions. Moreover, he got his wealth by putting good
doctors out of business with junk lawsuits.

William Graham
July 9th 07, 02:40 AM
"chalk" > wrote in message
...
>
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "chalk" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>>
>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Count Baldoni
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>>> they have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to
>>>> die a natural death and be taken over by some country whose management
>>>> has better things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>>
>>>
>>> Think of all the employees on the government payroll that it takes to
>>> enforce
>>> such nonsense. Why do you think the elitist liberal Al Gore dreamed up
>>> the Junk Science of "Global Warming"?
>>>
>> These are, "limousine liberals", like Barbara Streisand, Brad Pitt and
>> Angelina Jolie......They are always looking down on people who shop at
>> Wall-Mart. (They can afford to buy their veggies at Tiffanies) Or, as G.
>> Gordon Libby says, they want to save all the poor, downtrodden people of
>> the world using my money to do it with........I call them Robin-hooders.
>> They never saw a tax they didn't love, and they want to steal my money
>> and give it to the poor. They assume everyone who is rich got their money
>> as easily as they got theirs.....It never occurs to them that some of us
>> worked and saved for 40 years in order to get enough money to retire
>> on..........And we didn't get it by climbing up the backs of the poor.
>
>
> John Edwards is conducting a presidential campaign that is driven by
> "Two Americas," one rich & one poor. Of course, this is a classic
> liberal Democrat campaign based on class warfare. The hypocrisy is
> that Edwards routinely treats himself to $400 haircuts and owns
> several mansions. Moreover, he got his wealth by putting good
> doctors out of business with junk lawsuits.
>
According to his barber, the cut was more like $1200.....But that's beside
the point....I could care less. If that's the way he wants to spend his
money, then that's his business. I just don't like him wanting to steal my
money away from me and give it to his charitable institutions. I can do that
very well myself, thanks. In the final analysis, Robin Hood was no more than
a thief. The fact that he gave his stolen money to his favorite charity
doesn't make him any the less a thief.
When I was young my father told me to save 10% of everything I earned,
and I would always be independent and comfortable. So I did, and I was able
to retire a millionaire (or close to it) at 61. Now, people like Ralph Nadir
and Hillary and John Edwards want to steal my money away from me and give it
to the grasshoppers who laughed at the ants and fiddled away all Summer.
They are now talking about universal health care....Why do I pay over $700 a
month for my (and my family's) health care? Why would I want my government
to steal my tax dollars and buy health care for the grasshoppers? My father
would be rolling over in his grave if he knew. Should I go to where he is
buried and say, "You were wrong dad. I should have spent every cent I ever
earned on fast cars and booze and women, because today the grasshoppers are
at the door, and when I opened it a crack Hillary stuck her foot in it and
is making me pay for them! Nadir wants all my estate to revert to the
government when I die......He doesn't want me to leave any of it for my
children....But those children were the ones who had to go with less because
I was saving that 10% of my salary while they were growing up. They had to
do without those designer Jeans that the other kids were wearing, and they
had to ride around in my 10 year old jalopy while their classmates were
riding in new Porsches and MB's. Now, when I die, they are the ones who
deserve to inherit the balance of my estate, and not the government, who
will blow it away on trips to the moon and other boondoggles. But I don't
know how to tell Ralph Nadir this.....I don't get the chance to talk to the
likes of him. And. when I see him on TV, the other people who talk to him
don't say what I want to say to him. I am sick of standing up in the middle
of my living room floor and screaming at the TV.....(My wife is pretty sick
of it too.....:^)

(PeteCresswell)
July 9th 07, 02:45 AM
Per Matthew:
>Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>cats in or out

Similar to "Helmet" threads in rec.bicycles.tech.... They go on
and on and on..... and after you read a few, you recognize each
point in every following thread.
--
PeteCresswell

Matthew
July 9th 07, 02:58 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matthew" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
>> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>
>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
>> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
> It isn't a British/American thing....It's a city/residential/rural
> thing....There are some places where you just can't keep cats outside, and
> other places where it would be foolish to keep them inside. (see my post
> above)

Both you and me and a few others William know it is a matter of location,
choice. I may not believe in it but I know better than to try and convince
someone not to do it or to do it. They will do what they want no matter
what. We used to have barn cats when I was on the farm; where my nearest
neighbor was 2 miles away there was no road traffic, no predators. There I
had no problem with the cats being out. Here where I am with multiple
predators, cars and other dangers close there is no way they would be out.
That is my choice

Matthew
July 9th 07, 03:00 AM
"(PeteCresswell)" > wrote in message
...
> Per Matthew:
>>Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>>cats in or out
>
> Similar to "Helmet" threads in rec.bicycles.tech.... They go on
> and on and on..... and after you read a few, you recognize each
> point in every following thread.
> --
> PeteCresswell

It just gets old after a while If you can agree with me there Pete. It
seems it is always started by a newbie and the band wagon starts.
Than the ones that need to be on medication or out to prove they are right
and you a wrong come out. My kill file will fill up to summer is over again
more in likely

Ps how you been doing Pete haven't seen you post much

Charlie Wilkes
July 9th 07, 04:20 AM
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 14:28:17 -0700, bookie wrote:

> On 8 Jul, 20:53, Charlie Wilkes >
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:20:42 -0700, bookie wrote:
>> >> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view
>> >> point
>> >> you will never change it. People here have a different view point
>> >> you
>> >> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational
>> >> as past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You
>> >> all ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of
>> >> *******.
>>
>> > i didn't say a word about that! just about putting collars on cats,
>> > which i am opposed to fro several reasons, but i am sure someone will
>> > argue against me about it.
>> > i can't be arsed with getting into that tedious debate again; I am
>> > never going to change your mind and you are never to change mine no
>> > matter much we rant on, so we have to agree to disagree.
>>
>> Bookie, you goddamn liar, you posted about this less than 8 hours
>> ago...
>>
>> "keeping them captive indoors is against their nature you dumbo"
>>
>> Message-ID: om>
>>
>> You are an outdoor cat militant. I only hope your cats don't have to
>> pay the ultimate price for your wrong-headed view of this subject.
>>
>> Charlie
>
> you m,ake it sound like I make them live outdoors with no access to the
> indoors, totally incorrect, i just give them the choice and I leave the
> back door open whenever i am in.mostly they stay indoors where the soft
> cushions and the food is, sometimes they go to sunbathe outside and to
> check out their territory (our tiny back garden) but i like to give them
> the choice.
> i would rather they were able to go outside and exoperience a bit of
> nature than go stir crazy indoors.

Yes, you've explained your opinion before. My point is that you are a
chronic instigator on this subject, despite your protest to the contrary.

Charlie

William Graham
July 9th 07, 07:29 AM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Matthew" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep
>>> your cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again.
>>> And all of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic
>>> that you all do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even
>>> worse.
>>>
>>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all
>>> ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>> It isn't a British/American thing....It's a city/residential/rural
>> thing....There are some places where you just can't keep cats outside,
>> and other places where it would be foolish to keep them inside. (see my
>> post above)
>
> Both you and me and a few others William know it is a matter of location,
> choice. I may not believe in it but I know better than to try and
> convince someone not to do it or to do it. They will do what they want no
> matter what. We used to have barn cats when I was on the farm; where my
> nearest neighbor was 2 miles away there was no road traffic, no predators.
> There I had no problem with the cats being out. Here where I am with
> multiple predators, cars and other dangers close there is no way they
> would be out. That is my choice
>
Exactly. And, I respect that choice. That's why the argument is
ridiculous....It depends on the circumstances......If you lived on a farm,
even your dogs would probably run free. It is also, in some respects a
matter of convenience....We can leave the house for a week or more, and as
long as we leave them enough food and water, our cats will be sleeping in
the same spot we left them a week ago when we get back home. We don't have
to arrange for boarding or anything that one would have to do for animals
that are more dependent on people. If we were killed on the road, all of our
cats would eventually drift to the neighbor's houses and survive
easily......(Our neighbors already know them very well)

Little Hawk
July 9th 07, 08:39 AM
Matthew wrote:
> "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Per Matthew:
>>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>>> cats in or out
>> Similar to "Helmet" threads in rec.bicycles.tech.... They go on
>> and on and on..... and after you read a few, you recognize each
>> point in every following thread.
>> --
>> PeteCresswell
>
> It just gets old after a while If you can agree with me there Pete. It
> seems it is always started by a newbie and the band wagon starts.
> Than the ones that need to be on medication or out to prove they are right
> and you a wrong come out. My kill file will fill up to summer is over again
> more in likely
>
> Ps how you been doing Pete haven't seen you post much
>
>

i don't think there is a right or wrong when it comes to keeping a cat
indoors or letting the fur ball out for a romp.
all depends on location

Mr Tanaka
July 9th 07, 10:27 AM
On Jul 9, 8:30 am, Anne Jackson > wrote:

> Your cats probably go to your neighbours' gardens for a crap!

haha

Baldoni
July 9th 07, 12:14 PM
William Graham used his keyboard to write :
> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message >
>> I have never seen a cat on a motorway in my life, and I have spent a lot of
>> time driving on them.
>>
>> They are too damn noisy for one thing.
>>
> Cats don't like motorways, but they sometimes have to cross them in order to
> get where they are going....If the speed limit is 25 mph or less, the cats
> seldom have any problem with this.....It's when the teenagers are doing 40 in
> a 25 zone that the problems occur. Cats can't conceive of anything that goes
> that fast, and don't know how to avoid it......

I think we may use the same word for a different meaning as is common
with the English spoken in the UK and in America.

Our motorways are similar to a freeway or turnpike. The maximum speed
limit is 70mph though many go faster and the slowest anyone goes is
about 50mph which is considered way to slow.

The cat must have some important business if it wants to go across
there. I tried once in the evening and it was hard work. :-)

--
Count Baldoni

Sean Black
July 9th 07, 01:36 PM
In article m>, bookie
> writes
>On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>
>> ...>I would never let any
>>of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> > --
>> > Count Baldoni
>>
>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure they
>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has better
>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>
>believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
>it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
>the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
>us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>
This site is nothing more than a Government PR exercise which will
change nothing.

Anyone can enter a petition about anything on there, with the Government
supposedly takes notice of.

Recently there was one against road pricing that a couple of million
people signed, I believe. A few days after the petition closed the
Government announced it was pressing ahead with road pricing trials.
--
Sean Black

Sean Black
July 9th 07, 01:39 PM
In message om>,
bookie > writes
>On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>
>what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
>think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
>that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
>'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
>it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.
>
The reason my two cats have collars, is because besides a name tag with
our phone number, should either of them get lost or hurt, they have a
magnetic key to allow them (and not every other cat in the
neighbourhood) entry through the cat flap, allowing them to come and go
if they please. Nothing to do with marking ownership.
--
Sean Black

bookie
July 9th 07, 02:10 PM
On 9 Jul, 13:39, Sean Black > wrote:
> In message om>,
> bookie > writes
>
>
>
> >On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
> >> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>
> >>http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>
> >> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
> >> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>
> >> --
> >> Count Baldoni
>
> >what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
> >think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
> >that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
> >'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
> >it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.
>
> The reason my two cats have collars, is because besides a name tag with
> our phone number, should either of them get lost or hurt, they have a
> magnetic key to allow them (and not every other cat in the
> neighbourhood) entry through the cat flap, allowing them to come and go
> if they please. Nothing to do with marking ownership.
> --
> Sean Black- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

my cats don't go far enough to warrant a collar anyway. it is a
gorgeous day here right now, first rain free sunny day we have had for
weeks and where are my 2 girls? yup, one is stretched out onthe end of
my bed snoozing, and the other is fast asleep onthe sofa downstairs,
neither has any desire to go outside and enjoy the sun even though the
back door is wide open for them.

i feel like being my own mother and telling them to 'get yourselves
outside in the fresh air and get some sun and exercise!' but the views
of jessei flopped out nothe end of my bed behind me , mouth slightly
open , one paw over her pink nose, is too cute to disturb

William Graham
July 9th 07, 06:08 PM
"Sean Black" > wrote in message
...
> In article m>, bookie
> > writes
>>On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>>
>>> ...>I would never let any of
>>> my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> > --
>>> > Count Baldoni
>>>
>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>> they
>>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
>>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
>>> better
>>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>
>>believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
>>it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
>>the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
>>us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>>
> This site is nothing more than a Government PR exercise which will change
> nothing.
>
> Anyone can enter a petition about anything on there, with the Government
> supposedly takes notice of.
>
> Recently there was one against road pricing that a couple of million
> people signed, I believe. A few days after the petition closed the
> Government announced it was pressing ahead with road pricing trials.
> --
> Sean Black

If by, "road pricing" you mean stopping autos and collecting money from the
drivers, then it is a real PIA.....We do that on selected roads here on the
East coast. - A very inefficient process. Obviously, the best way to pay for
things like that is through gasoline taxes. When millions of cars have to
come to a stop and re-accelerate back up to speed every year, much gasoline
is just being thrown away......

William Graham
July 9th 07, 06:13 PM
"Sean Black" > wrote in message
...
> In message om>, bookie
> > writes
>>On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>>> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>>
>>> http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>
>>> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Count Baldoni
>>
>>what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
>>think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
>>that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
>>'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
>>it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.
>>
> The reason my two cats have collars, is because besides a name tag with
> our phone number, should either of them get lost or hurt, they have a
> magnetic key to allow them (and not every other cat in the neighbourhood)
> entry through the cat flap, allowing them to come and go if they please.
> Nothing to do with marking ownership.
> --
> Sean Black

An excellent idea! - I don't believe such a device is for sale here in the
US....I could use it, (If my feral male could keep a collar on) so the
raccoons wouldn't be able to come in the house....Right now, I have to
depend on my, "watch cats" to prevent that.......

William Graham
July 9th 07, 06:17 PM
"bookie" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On 9 Jul, 13:39, Sean Black > wrote:
>> In message om>,
>> bookie > writes
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 7 Jul, 13:36, Baldoni > wrote:
>> >> I would never let any of my cats wear a collar.
>>
>> >>http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>
>> >> Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>> >> agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Count Baldoni
>>
>> >what a load of ********! I too would never oput a collar on a cat, I
>> >think it is unnecessary and utterly inhumane to put something like
>> >that on any animal, trying to mark out another animal as something we
>> >'own' when i believe that no animal onthis earth has to right to think
>> >it 'owns' any other, utterly despicable practise.
>>
>> The reason my two cats have collars, is because besides a name tag with
>> our phone number, should either of them get lost or hurt, they have a
>> magnetic key to allow them (and not every other cat in the
>> neighbourhood) entry through the cat flap, allowing them to come and go
>> if they please. Nothing to do with marking ownership.
>> --
>> Sean Black- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> my cats don't go far enough to warrant a collar anyway. it is a
> gorgeous day here right now, first rain free sunny day we have had for
> weeks and where are my 2 girls? yup, one is stretched out onthe end of
> my bed snoozing, and the other is fast asleep onthe sofa downstairs,
> neither has any desire to go outside and enjoy the sun even though the
> back door is wide open for them.
>
> i feel like being my own mother and telling them to 'get yourselves
> outside in the fresh air and get some sun and exercise!' but the views
> of jessei flopped out nothe end of my bed behind me , mouth slightly
> open , one paw over her pink nose, is too cute to disturb
>
It's a good thing cats are such cute animals....If they weren't, few would
be able to stand their obnoxious personalities, and there would be millions
less of them kept as pets.....:^)

CatNipped[_2_]
July 9th 07, 06:47 PM
"Anne Jackson" > wrote in message
...
> The message from sheelagh > contains these
> words:
>
>> > (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>> >
>> LOL.
>> I thought being the plural, they would?
>
> Only if your a greengrocer! Plurality is _never_ a case
> for apostrophising!

And if we're going to be the spelling/grammar police, "you are" into a
contraction is "you're" and there's no such word as "apostrophising". ;>

Hugs,

CatNipped

>
> --
> AnneJ
>
> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> ~Shelley Long
>
>
>
>
>

cybercat
July 9th 07, 09:31 PM
"William Graham" > wrote
> It's a good thing cats are such cute animals....If they weren't, few would
> be able to stand their obnoxious personalities, and there would be
> millions less of them kept as pets.....:^)

You are such a moron.

CatNipped[_2_]
July 9th 07, 10:07 PM
"Anne Jackson" > wrote in message
...
> The message from "CatNipped" > contains
> these words:
>> "Anne Jackson" > wrote:
>> > The message from sheelagh > contains
>> > these
>> > words:
>> >
>> >> > (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>> >> >
>> >> LOL.
>> >> I thought being the plural, they would?
>> >
>> > Only if your a greengrocer! Plurality is _never_ a case
>> > for apostrophising!
>
>> And if we're going to be the spelling/grammar police, "you are" into a
>> contraction is "you're" and there's no such word as "apostrophising". ;>
>
>> Hugs,
>
>> CatNipped
>
> It's traditional that a spelling correction should contain a spelling
> mistake,
> and *of course* 'apostrophising' is a word! I just invented it!!
> Sheesh...

LOL!

Hugs,

CatNipped

>
> --
> AnneJ
>
> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> ~Shelley Long
>
>
>
>
>

sheelagh
July 10th 07, 12:54 AM
On 9 Jul, 00:04, "Stacey Weinberger" > wrote:
> >> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from uk.rec.gardening!
>
> >> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>
> >> --
> >> AnneJ
>
> >> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> >> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> >> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > LOL.
> > I thought being the plural, they would?
> > But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
> > you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
> > say!!
> > sorry!
> > Sheelagh :o)
>
> Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of that
> lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The apostrophe
> denotes possession or a contraction.
>
> Stacey- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OK, now I am really confused.
Which one has the right way of spelling it?
Arguments over spelling are no fun at all.
I was only trying to say that a Tosser means the same in the UK as it
does in the USA, that is is all?
sheelagh

bookie
July 10th 07, 01:27 AM
On 10 Jul, 00:54, sheelagh > wrote:
> On 9 Jul, 00:04, "Stacey Weinberger" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from uk.rec.gardening!
>
> > >> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>
> > >> --
> > >> AnneJ
>
> > >> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> > >> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> > >> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>
> > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > LOL.
> > > I thought being the plural, they would?
> > > But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
> > > you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
> > > say!!
> > > sorry!
> > > Sheelagh :o)
>
> > Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of that
> > lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The apostrophe
> > denotes possession or a contraction.
>
> > Stacey- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> OK, now I am really confused.
> Which one has the right way of spelling it?
> Arguments over spelling are no fun at all.
> I was only trying to say that a Tosser means the same in the UK as it
> does in the USA, that is is all?
> sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

just use 'pillock' and be done with it

Matthew
July 10th 07, 01:53 AM
"bookie" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On 10 Jul, 00:54, sheelagh > wrote:
>> On 9 Jul, 00:04, "Stacey Weinberger" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > >> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from
>> > >> uk.rec.gardening!
>>
>> > >> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>>
>> > >> --
>> > >> AnneJ
>>
>> > >> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
>> > >> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
>> > >> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > > LOL.
>> > > I thought being the plural, they would?
>> > > But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
>> > > you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
>> > > say!!
>> > > sorry!
>> > > Sheelagh :o)
>>
>> > Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of
>> > that
>> > lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The
>> > apostrophe
>> > denotes possession or a contraction.
>>
>> > Stacey- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> OK, now I am really confused.
>> Which one has the right way of spelling it?
>> Arguments over spelling are no fun at all.
>> I was only trying to say that a Tosser means the same in the UK as it
>> does in the USA, that is is all?
>> sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> just use 'pillock' and be done with it
>

Barry is not ;-)

My Shangri-La
July 10th 07, 12:41 PM
Matthew wrote:

> Barry is not ;-)

it's cost me more than one job, showing up late

I like to dance in the mirror to some kc and the sunshine band

the cats like to dance too

sheelagh
July 10th 07, 01:15 PM
On 10 Jul, 01:27, bookie > wrote:
> On 10 Jul, 00:54, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 9 Jul, 00:04, "Stacey Weinberger" > wrote:
>
> > > >> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from uk.rec.gardening!
>
> > > >> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> AnneJ
>
> > > >> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> > > >> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> > > >> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > LOL.
> > > > I thought being the plural, they would?
> > > > But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
> > > > you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
> > > > say!!
> > > > sorry!
> > > > Sheelagh :o)
>
> > > Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of that
> > > lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The apostrophe
> > > denotes possession or a contraction.
>
> > > Stacey- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > OK, now I am really confused.
> > Which one has the right way of spelling it?
> > Arguments over spelling are no fun at all.
> > I was only trying to say that a Tosser means the same in the UK as it
> > does in the USA, that is is all?
> > sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> just use 'pillock' and be done with it- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

" PILLOCK"
There, thread over....
(I doubt it, but you can't say I didn't try)
Sheelagh

Sean Black
July 10th 07, 01:29 PM
In message >, William
Graham > writes
>
>"Sean Black" > wrote in message
...
>> In article m>, bookie
>> > writes
>>>On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> ...>I would never let any of
>>>> my cats wear a collar.
>>>>
>>>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>
>>>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>>
>>>> > --
>>>> > Count Baldoni
>>>>
>>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>>> they
>>>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die a
>>>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
>>>> better
>>>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>>
>>>believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
>>>it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
>>>the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
>>>us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>>>
>> This site is nothing more than a Government PR exercise which will change
>> nothing.
>>
>> Anyone can enter a petition about anything on there, with the Government
>> supposedly takes notice of.
>>
>> Recently there was one against road pricing that a couple of million
>> people signed, I believe. A few days after the petition closed the
>> Government announced it was pressing ahead with road pricing trials.
>> --
>> Sean Black
>
>If by, "road pricing" you mean stopping autos and collecting money from the
>drivers, then it is a real PIA.....We do that on selected roads here on the
>East coast. - A very inefficient process. Obviously, the best way to pay for
>things like that is through gasoline taxes. When millions of cars have to
>come to a stop and re-accelerate back up to speed every year, much gasoline
>is just being thrown away......
>
>
Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box" to every car,
tracking when and where it goes and charging per mile, at varying rates
(depending on type of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times, rising to (I've heard)
1.34 (something over $2) per mile on motorways at peak times.

Leaving aside the whole Big Brother aspect of having all your movements
tracked, if they bring that in at those sort of prices, there'll be
plenty of people that wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if
they wanted to (me included).

--
Sean Black

sheelagh
July 10th 07, 03:28 PM
On 10 Jul, 01:53, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "bookie" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 10 Jul, 00:54, sheelagh > wrote:
> >> On 9 Jul, 00:04, "Stacey Weinberger" > wrote:
>
> >> > >> Nobody 'started it'. Someone half-inched a thread from
> >> > >> uk.rec.gardening!
>
> >> > >> (and Sheelagh, "*******" doesn't have an apostrophe!)
>
> >> > >> --
> >> > >> AnneJ
>
> >> > >> If you don't quit, and don't cheat, and don't run home
> >> > >> when trouble arrives, you can only win.
> >> > >> ~Shelley Long- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >> > > LOL.
> >> > > I thought being the plural, they would?
> >> > > But then again, I haven't been reading or writing for that long, so
> >> > > you are probably correct, & I am wrong. You live and learn as they
> >> > > say!!
> >> > > sorry!
> >> > > Sheelagh :o)
>
> >> > Never. This is a new perversion of the language. You see a lot of
> >> > that
> >> > lately along with confusing then with than, your with you're, The
> >> > apostrophe
> >> > denotes possession or a contraction.
>
> >> > Stacey- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> OK, now I am really confused.
> >> Which one has the right way of spelling it?
> >> Arguments over spelling are no fun at all.
> >> I was only trying to say that a Tosser means the same in the UK as it
> >> does in the USA, that is is all?
> >> sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > just use 'pillock' and be done with it
>
> Barry is not ;-)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You know something...
I noticed that too....LOL
Sheelagh

My Shangri-La
July 10th 07, 09:08 PM
sheelagh wrote:

> You know something...
> I noticed that too....LOL
> Sheelagh

you did exactly what I knew you would do

you sent charlie, and probably everybody else a copy of my email
but you forgot to fwd your reply

Im not going to post it. I never will.

Why did you quote the part you did, "be nice to people then smash
them"
come on now, you should have copied paragraph before and after...
you know that... You just asked me a question in another thread, here
is one for you,

what made you think of those words, out of all the replies, why those
words...?

cybercat
July 10th 07, 09:33 PM
"My Shangri-La" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> sheelagh wrote:
>
>> You know something...
>> I noticed that too....LOL
>> Sheelagh
>
> you did exactly what I knew you would do
>
> you sent charlie, and probably everybody else a copy of my email
> but you forgot to fwd your reply
>
> Im not going to post it. I never will.
>
> Why did you quote the part you did, "be nice to people then smash
> them"
> come on now, you should have copied paragraph before and after...
> you know that... You just asked me a question in another thread, here
> is one for you,
>
> what made you think of those words, out of all the replies, why those
> words...?
>

You live for this ****. You create drama because you are empty, sick, and
sad. The most horrible thing is that you have to display it to the world.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

....Baldoni
July 10th 07, 10:05 PM
Matthew brought next idea :
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will never
> change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past threads and
> this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up acting like how
> do the British say it a bunch of *******.

Don't get me wrong here mate but the post was about a guy wasting his
time with a petition that cats should be made to wear bells. If people
want to rack on about cats being kept in or out that is not of
consequence to me and is not done on my account. :-)

--
Count Baldoni

William Graham
July 10th 07, 10:19 PM
"Sean Black" > wrote in message
...
> In message >, William Graham
> > writes
>>
>>"Sean Black" > wrote in message
...
>>> In article m>, bookie
>>> > writes
>>>>On 7 Jul, 23:27, "William Graham" > wrote:
>>>>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> ...>I would never let any
>>>>> of
>>>>> my cats wear a collar.
>>>>>
>>>>> >http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/control-pet-cats/
>>>>>
>>>>> > Saying that the people in the UK are watched and spied upon by Govt
>>>>> > agencies, who knows what is next. Camera's in trees !
>>>>>
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Count Baldoni
>>>>>
>>>>> Any country that has nothing better to do than catch cats to make sure
>>>>> they
>>>>> have collars with one or more regulation bells on them deserves to die
>>>>> a
>>>>> natural death and be taken over by some country whose management has
>>>>> better
>>>>> things to do....GB is no exception.........
>>>>
>>>>believe me, we the british public also think this is a pile of crap so
>>>>it won't go through, you will probably find it is something to dow ith
>>>>the EU forcing some sort of unenforceable and pointless ruling onto
>>>>us, the EU is usually the cause of idiotic things like this
>>>>
>>> This site is nothing more than a Government PR exercise which will
>>> change
>>> nothing.
>>>
>>> Anyone can enter a petition about anything on there, with the Government
>>> supposedly takes notice of.
>>>
>>> Recently there was one against road pricing that a couple of million
>>> people signed, I believe. A few days after the petition closed the
>>> Government announced it was pressing ahead with road pricing trials.
>>> --
>>> Sean Black
>>
>>If by, "road pricing" you mean stopping autos and collecting money from
>>the
>>drivers, then it is a real PIA.....We do that on selected roads here on
>>the
>>East coast. - A very inefficient process. Obviously, the best way to pay
>>for
>>things like that is through gasoline taxes. When millions of cars have to
>>come to a stop and re-accelerate back up to speed every year, much
>>gasoline
>>is just being thrown away......
>>
>>
> Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box" to every car,
> tracking when and where it goes and charging per mile, at varying rates
> (depending on type of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times, rising to (I've heard)
> 1.34 (something over $2) per mile on motorways at peak times.
>
> Leaving aside the whole Big Brother aspect of having all your movements
> tracked, if they bring that in at those sort of prices, there'll be plenty
> of people that wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> wanted to (me included).
>
> --
> Sean Black

Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more easily....Besides, they
encourage driving vehicles that get better mileage, too......The smaller and
lighter and more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay, and this
is as it should be, because the less wear and tear on the roads, and the
less pollution you emit into the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as
this?
Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's around, but
then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a gallon back in 1950,
and now, some 50 years later, when it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is
still only $3.00 a gallon....So, people are complaining about
nothing........

Ivor Jones
July 10th 07, 11:58 PM
"William Graham" > wrote in message

> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> message ...

[snip]

> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > aspect of having
> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > wanted to (me included).
>
> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> nothing........

Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
(depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per mile
driven.

(Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)


Ivor

William Graham
July 11th 07, 01:45 AM
"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
>> message ...
>
> [snip]
>
>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
>> > aspect of having
>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
>> > wanted to (me included).
>>
>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
>> nothing........
>
> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per mile
> driven.
>
> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
>
> Ivor
>
Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful that
the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back the
food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It seems
that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming the
same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health personnel
and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be able to
choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----", and go to
any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)

William Graham
July 11th 07, 02:07 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
>>> message ...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
>>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
>>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
>>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
>>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
>>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
>>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
>>> > aspect of having
>>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
>>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
>>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
>>> > wanted to (me included).
>>>
>>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
>>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
>>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
>>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
>>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
>>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
>>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
>>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
>>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
>>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
>>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
>>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
>>> nothing........
>>
>> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
>> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
>> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
>> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
>> mile driven.
>>
>> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
>> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>>
>>
>> Ivor
>>
> Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It
> seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)
>
And, if you are a republican capitalist like me, they would come out to the
waiting room and tell my wife...."I'm sorry, but your husband didn't survive
the operation....."

chalk
July 11th 07, 02:50 AM
"William Graham" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
>>> message ...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
>>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
>>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
>>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
>>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
>>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
>>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
>>> > aspect of having
>>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
>>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
>>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
>>> > wanted to (me included).
>>>
>>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
>>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
>>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
>>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
>>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
>>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
>>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
>>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
>>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
>>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
>>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
>>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
>>> nothing........
>>
>> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
>> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
>> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
>> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
>> mile driven.
>>
>> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
>> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>>
>>
>> Ivor
>>
> Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It
> seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)


Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
country.

"If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
budget.

Cheryl
July 11th 07, 03:08 AM
On Tue 10 Jul 2007 05:19:16p, William Graham wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
>:

> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that get
> better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and more
> efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay, and this is as
> it should be, because the less wear and tear on the roads, and
> the less pollution you emit into the air, too. Why mess with a
> system as good as this?
> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> around, but
> then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a gallon back
> in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when it should be over
> $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00 a gallon....So, people
> are complaining about nothing........

My comment about driving bigger vehicles now is because there are
so many of them, if you drive a small car and get smashed into,
you're toast. I went from a small pickup truck to a big pickup
truck and noticed that people acually think twice about pulling in
front of you when they can see you in their mirror (if they care to
look). I drive the Capital Beltway
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Beltway) every day and I
would never drive a small economy car.

--
Cheryl

William Graham
July 11th 07, 04:03 AM
"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue 10 Jul 2007 05:19:16p, William Graham wrote in
> rec.pets.cats.health+behav
> >:
>
>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that get
>> better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and more
>> efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay, and this is as
>> it should be, because the less wear and tear on the roads, and
>> the less pollution you emit into the air, too. Why mess with a
>> system as good as this?
>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
>> around, but
>> then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a gallon back
>> in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when it should be over
>> $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00 a gallon....So, people
>> are complaining about nothing........
>
> My comment about driving bigger vehicles now is because there are
> so many of them, if you drive a small car and get smashed into,
> you're toast. I went from a small pickup truck to a big pickup
> truck and noticed that people acually think twice about pulling in
> front of you when they can see you in their mirror (if they care to
> look). I drive the Capital Beltway
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Beltway) every day and I
> would never drive a small economy car.
>
> --
> Cheryl
>
>
You should drive whatever you want within your budget.....I have never liked
big cars....I owned an MG-A in my youth, and it was the nicest, best
handling car I ever drove....The Brits made lots of nice sports cars in
those days, but the unions ruined most of those firms, and today, the only
British cars that have survived are the "boats" like we have here in the
US. - If I buy a new car today, it will probably be a Miata. I remember the
Jaguar XK-E....What a beautiful machine! I was going to buy one when I got
enough money....But by the time I had the money they were
discontinued........The Lotus Elite was another one....Just like my MG-A,
but all leather and with a powerful engine....Again, gone by the time I
could afford one. Today, all I can buy are boats like the Queen Mary....With
whistles that you have to blow 4 times whenever you pull away from the
curb....:^)

Sean Black
July 11th 07, 09:50 AM
In message >, William
Graham > writes
>
>"Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
...
>> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>>
>>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
>>> message ...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
>>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
>>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
>>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
>>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
>>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
>>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
>>> > aspect of having
>>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
>>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
>>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
>>> > wanted to (me included).
>>>
>>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
>>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
>>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
>>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
>>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
>>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
>>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
>>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
>>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
>>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
>>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
>>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
>>> nothing........
>>
>> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
>> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
>> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
>> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per mile
>> driven.
>>
>> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
>> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>>
>>
>> Ivor
>>
>Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful that
>the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back the
>food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It seems
>that Robin Hood has become the national norm....

It's certainly heading that way, don't worry about that. Just about
every day you look in the paper they're finding something else to tax
:-(

If I could afford to, I'd sell up and move abroad like a shot.
--
Sean Black

kraut
July 11th 07, 02:25 PM
> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all of
> you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all do
> this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>
> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point you
> will never change it. People here have a different view point you will never
> change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as past threads and
> this one have proven time and time again. You all ended up acting like how
> do the British say it a bunch of *******.


Forget about who started it!! The morons who keep carrying on about
it and keep it going are the ones to complain about.

If you do not like a subject let it be without replying to it and it
will die. If you keep replying to it them you have no right to
complain about it 'cause you are as much to blame as the person that
started it.




************************************************** ***
E-mail address altered to foil spam.
Reply to news groups for all to see please.

_
/ )
(\__/) ( (
) ( ) )
={ }= / /
) `-------/ /
( /
\ |
,'\ , ,'
`-'\ ,---\ | \
_) ) `. \ /
(__/ ) )
(_/



(\__/)
)oo(
={ >}=


************************************************** ***

Matthew
July 11th 07, 06:45 PM
"....Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
> Matthew brought next idea :
>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
>> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>
>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
>> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> Don't get me wrong here mate but the post was about a guy wasting his time
> with a petition that cats should be made to wear bells. If people want to
> rack on about cats being kept in or out that is not of consequence to me
> and is not done on my account. :-)
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
Actually I need to apologize to you. I didn't mean it was you it was meant
in general. My apologies.

This yell feast just happened two weeks ago than less than a month before
that. It always starts from a newbie ( not you but in general ), it gets
cross posted and the bandwagon starts. Some how it starts someone says in,
someone says out. Than the control freaks; the ones that have to be right
and just want to argue no matter what. The ones that need medication and
the trolls come out beyond belief.

It tears the group up. This topic is just as bad as the declawing issue if
not worse. You can always tell hen school is out for the summer.

So I hope you accept the apology

Baldoni
July 11th 07, 08:40 PM
Matthew wrote :
> "....Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matthew brought next idea :
>>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>>> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
>>> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>>
>>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
>>> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong here mate but the post was about a guy wasting his time
>> with a petition that cats should be made to wear bells. If people want to
>> rack on about cats being kept in or out that is not of consequence to me
>> and is not done on my account. :-)
>>
>> -- Count Baldoni
>>
> Actually I need to apologize to you. I didn't mean it was you it was meant
> in general. My apologies.
>
> This yell feast just happened two weeks ago than less than a month before
> that. It always starts from a newbie ( not you but in general ), it gets
> cross posted and the bandwagon starts. Some how it starts someone says in,
> someone says out. Than the control freaks; the ones that have to be right
> and just want to argue no matter what. The ones that need medication and the
> trolls come out beyond belief.
>
> It tears the group up. This topic is just as bad as the declawing issue if
> not worse. You can always tell hen school is out for the summer.
>
> So I hope you accept the apology

No problem at all apology accepted. :D

--
Count Baldoni

chalk
July 11th 07, 10:35 PM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> "....Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matthew brought next idea :
>>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep
>>> your cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again.
>>> And all of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic
>>> that you all do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even
>>> worse.
>>>
>>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all
>>> ended up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong here mate but the post was about a guy wasting his
>> time with a petition that cats should be made to wear bells. If people
>> want to rack on about cats being kept in or out that is not of
>> consequence to me and is not done on my account. :-)
>>
>> --
>> Count Baldoni
>>
> Actually I need to apologize to you. I didn't mean it was you it was
> meant in general. My apologies.
>
> This yell feast just happened two weeks ago than less than a month before
> that. It always starts from a newbie ( not you but in general ), it gets
> cross posted and the bandwagon starts. Some how it starts someone says
> in, someone says out. Than the control freaks; the ones that have to be
> right and just want to argue no matter what. The ones that need
> medication and the trolls come out beyond belief.
>
> It tears the group up. This topic is just as bad as the declawing issue
> if not worse. You can always tell hen school is out for the summer.
>
> So I hope you accept the apology




If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen......

If you don't like the program, change the channel.....

Then again, maybe you just like to whine, and whine, and whine.......

chalk
July 11th 07, 10:39 PM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> This yell feast just happened two weeks ago than less than a month before
> that. It always starts from a newbie ( not you but in general ), it gets
> cross posted and the bandwagon starts. Some how it starts someone says
> in, someone says out. Than the control freaks; the ones that have to be
> right and just want to argue no matter what. The ones that need
> medication and the trolls come out beyond belief.



Sounds like *you* are the control freak? The beauty of Usenet is the
free-wheeling discussions and comments, no matter how bad or how
off topic........... If you want controlled discussions, go to a
moderated
forum or go live in Cuba with Michael Moore & Fidel.....

William Graham
July 11th 07, 11:18 PM
"Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
> William Graham used his keyboard to write :
>> "Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message >
>>> I have never seen a cat on a motorway in my life, and I have spent a lot
>>> of time driving on them.
>>>
>>> They are too damn noisy for one thing.
>>>
>> Cats don't like motorways, but they sometimes have to cross them in order
>> to get where they are going....If the speed limit is 25 mph or less, the
>> cats seldom have any problem with this.....It's when the teenagers are
>> doing 40 in a 25 zone that the problems occur. Cats can't conceive of
>> anything that goes that fast, and don't know how to avoid it......
>
> I think we may use the same word for a different meaning as is common with
> the English spoken in the UK and in America.
>
> Our motorways are similar to a freeway or turnpike. The maximum speed
> limit is 70mph though many go faster and the slowest anyone goes is about
> 50mph which is considered way to slow.
>
> The cat must have some important business if it wants to go across there.
> I tried once in the evening and it was hard work. :-)
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
>
Yes....If I lived less than a quarter mile or so from such a road, I
wouldn't own any cats....When I retired and moved up here to Oregon, I was
careful to pick a house that was, "feline friendly", so my cats are
reasonably safe wandering around the neighborhood....It is full of children
and old people who like animals. But that's why I am annoyed at people who
don't observe the 25 mph residential speed limit........

William Graham
July 11th 07, 11:25 PM
"....Baldoni @googlemail.com>" <baldoniXXV<nil> wrote in message
...
> Matthew brought next idea :
>> Here we go again another newbie starts a thread. Someone says keep your
>> cats in or out and this BS debate of inside or out starts again. And all
>> of you jump on the band wagon it is getting pretty pathetic that you all
>> do this. And now with the cross posting it gets even worse.
>>
>> Would you all get over it People over seas have a different view point
>> you will never change it. People here have a different view point you
>> will never change it. You can't debate or even discuss it rational as
>> past threads and this one have proven time and time again. You all ended
>> up acting like how do the British say it a bunch of *******.
>
> Don't get me wrong here mate but the post was about a guy wasting his time
> with a petition that cats should be made to wear bells. If people want to
> rack on about cats being kept in or out that is not of consequence to me
> and is not done on my account. :-)
>
> --
> Count Baldoni
>
>
And, it's a simple choice....I have one cat who loves them, and another who
can't stand them....So, I remove the bells from BK'd collar, and put them on
Junie's collar.....IOW, I let the cats decide. (after all, they decide
almost everything else)

Matthew
July 11th 07, 11:42 PM
"chalk" >

Defintely added to the kill file

Make sure you get enough sleep school stats back up soon

<PLONK>

bookie
July 11th 07, 11:52 PM
On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> . ..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> >>> ...
>
> >> [snip]
>
> >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> >>> > aspect of having
> >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> >>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> >>> nothing........
>
> >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> >> mile driven.
>
> >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> >> Ivor
>
> > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It
> > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> > able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)
>
> Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> country.
>
> "If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
> need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
even taken up the arse from behind?

she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
all.

and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
bookie

William Graham
July 12th 07, 12:13 AM
"bookie" > wrote in message

I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
our tv constantly. ....

I always have this love-hate relationship with the Democratic candidates
just before the election.....I am a devout Republican, so I would choose
almost any Republican over any Democrat. So, I don't know whether to route
for the worst democrat I can find, hoping they will get their parties
nomination, and then be soundly trounced by the Republican in the general
election, or route for the best person in both parties, hoping to maximize
my chances of getting a reasonable president regardless of which party
wins......In the past, I have even been known to register Democratic, just
so I could vote for their least likely to win candidate in the primaries,
thereby giving my real choice (the Republican) a better chance of winning in
the general election.

bookie
July 12th 07, 12:34 AM
On 12 Jul, 00:13, "William Graham" > wrote:
> "bookie" > wrote in message
>
> I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
> our tv constantly. ....
>
> I always have this love-hate relationship with the Democratic candidates
> just before the election.....I am a devout Republican, so I would choose
> almost any Republican over any Democrat. So, I don't know whether to route
> for the worst democrat I can find, hoping they will get their parties
> nomination, and then be soundly trounced by the Republican in the general
> election, or route for the best person in both parties, hoping to maximize
> my chances of getting a reasonable president regardless of which party
> wins......In the past, I have even been known to register Democratic, just
> so I could vote for their least likely to win candidate in the primaries,
> thereby giving my real choice (the Republican) a better chance of winning in
> the general election.

I have no idea what you are on about, i just think hillary clinton is
a minger

sheelagh
July 12th 07, 01:02 AM
On 11 Jul, 23:52, bookie > wrote:
> On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> . ..
>
> > > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> >
> > >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> > >>> ...
>
> > >> [snip]
>
> > >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> > >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > >>> > aspect of having
> > >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> > >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> > >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> > >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> > >>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> > >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> > >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> > >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> > >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> > >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> > >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> > >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> > >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> > >>> nothing........
>
> > >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> > >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> > >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> > >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> > >> mile driven.
>
> > >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> > >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> > >> Ivor
>
> > > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > > the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have.....It
> > > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> > > able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > > and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General"......:^)
>
> > Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> > failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> > be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> > America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> > the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> > of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> > America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> > country.
>
> > "If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
> > need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> > the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> > neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> > budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
> our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
> that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
> even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
> expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
> even taken up the arse from behind?
>
> she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
> intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
> all.
>
> and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
> have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
> bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not to mention Cherrie Blair, lol
Now that did give the rags & Sunday mags a field day, didn't it?
PS: does everyone understand what a minger is here?
sheelagh

chalk
July 12th 07, 03:31 AM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> "chalk" >
>
> Defintely added to the kill file
>
> Make sure you get enough sleep school stats back up soon
>
> <PLONK>



Sticks & Stones will break ...............

YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWN

Charlie Wilkes
July 12th 07, 06:47 AM
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:34:31 -0700, bookie wrote:
>
> I have no idea what you are on about, i just think hillary clinton is a
> minger

Some women think she's hot...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Sudw4ghVe8

Charlie

bookie
July 12th 07, 02:58 PM
On 12 Jul, 01:02, sheelagh > wrote:
> On 11 Jul, 23:52, bookie > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
>
> > > "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> > . ..
>
> > > > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> > >
> > > >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> > > >>> ...
>
> > > >> [snip]
>
> > > >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > > >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > > >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > > >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> > > >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > > >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > > >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > > >>> > aspect of having
> > > >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > > >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > > >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > > >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> > > >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> > > >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> > > >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> > > >>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> > > >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> > > >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> > > >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> > > >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> > > >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> > > >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> > > >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> > > >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> > > >>> nothing........
>
> > > >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> > > >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> > > >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> > > >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> > > >> mile driven.
>
> > > >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> > > >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> > > >> Ivor
>
> > > > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > > > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > > > the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have......It
> > > > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > > > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > > > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > > > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> > > > able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > > > and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General"......:^)
>
> > > Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> > > failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> > > be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> > > America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> > > the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> > > of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> > > America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> > > country.
>
> > > "If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
> > > need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> > > the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> > > neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> > > budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> > that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
> > our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
> > that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
> > even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
> > expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
> > even taken up the arse from behind?
>
> > she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
> > intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
> > all.
>
> > and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
> > have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
> > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Not to mention Cherrie Blair, lol
> Now that did give the rags & Sunday mags a field day, didn't it?
> PS: does everyone understand what a minger is here?
> sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

oh yeah i forgot about cherie blair, the woman with a mouth like a
letterbox, she's grim too and very dumpy

sheelagh
July 12th 07, 04:14 PM
On 12 Jul, 14:58, bookie > wrote:
> On 12 Jul, 01:02, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 11 Jul, 23:52, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
>
> > > > "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> > > . ..
>
> > > > > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> > > > >>> ...
>
> > > > >> [snip]
>
> > > > >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > > > >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > > > >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > > > >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> > > > >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > > > >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > > > >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > > > >>> > aspect of having
> > > > >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > > > >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > > > >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > > > >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> > > > >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> > > > >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> > > > >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> > > > >>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> > > > >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> > > > >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> > > > >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> > > > >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> > > > >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> > > > >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> > > > >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> > > > >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> > > > >>> nothing........
>
> > > > >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> > > > >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> > > > >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> > > > >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> > > > >> mile driven.
>
> > > > >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> > > > >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> > > > >> Ivor
>
> > > > > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > > > > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > > > > the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have......It
> > > > > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > > > > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > > > > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > > > > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> > > > > able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > > > > and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General"......:^)
>
> > > > Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> > > > failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> > > > be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> > > > America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> > > > the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> > > > of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> > > > America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> > > > country.
>
> > > > "If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
> > > > need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> > > > the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> > > > neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> > > > budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> > > that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
> > > our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
> > > that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
> > > even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
> > > expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
> > > even taken up the arse from behind?
>
> > > she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
> > > intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
> > > all.
>
> > > and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
> > > have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
> > > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Not to mention Cherrie Blair, lol
> > Now that did give the rags & Sunday mags a field day, didn't it?
> > PS: does everyone understand what a minger is here?
> > sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> oh yeah i forgot about cherie blair, the woman with a mouth like a
> letterbox, she's grim too and very dumpy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

ROFLOL...
Dunno why though, cuz for all her ugly features, she is more
intelligent than I am & far richer too
sheelagh

bookie
July 12th 07, 05:42 PM
On 12 Jul, 16:14, sheelagh > wrote:
> On 12 Jul, 14:58, bookie > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 12 Jul, 01:02, sheelagh > wrote:
>
> > > On 11 Jul, 23:52, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > > On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
>
> > > > > "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> > > > . ..
>
> > > > > > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > > >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> > > > > >>> ...
>
> > > > > >> [snip]
>
> > > > > >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > > > > >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > > > > >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > > > > >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billing you. A few
> > > > > >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > > > > >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > > > > >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > > > > >>> > aspect of having
> > > > > >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > > > > >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > > > > >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > > > > >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> > > > > >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> > > > > >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> > > > > >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> > > > > >>> more efficient your vehicle, the less you have to pay,
> > > > > >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> > > > > >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollution you emit into
> > > > > >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> > > > > >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> > > > > >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> > > > > >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> > > > > >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> > > > > >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> > > > > >>> nothing........
>
> > > > > >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> > > > > >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> > > > > >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> > > > > >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> > > > > >> mile driven.
>
> > > > > >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> > > > > >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> > > > > >> Ivor
>
> > > > > > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > > > > > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > > > > > the food, clothing, and housing that they think you should have......It
> > > > > > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > > > > > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > > > > > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > > > > > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Then you will be
> > > > > > able to choose any doctor you want as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > > > > > and go to any hospital you want as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)
>
> > > > > Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> > > > > failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> > > > > be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> > > > > America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> > > > > the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> > > > > of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> > > > > America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> > > > > country.
>
> > > > > "If you don't give our boys the equipment and support they
> > > > > need to fight, what do you expect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> > > > > the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> > > > > neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> > > > > budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> > > > that she is over there with you and not over here in england and on
> > > > our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
> > > > that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
> > > > even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
> > > > expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
> > > > even taken up the arse from behind?
>
> > > > she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
> > > > intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
> > > > all.
>
> > > > and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
> > > > have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
> > > > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Not to mention Cherrie Blair, lol
> > > Now that did give the rags & Sunday mags a field day, didn't it?
> > > PS: does everyone understand what a minger is here?
> > > sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > oh yeah i forgot about cherie blair, the woman with a mouth like a
> > letterbox, she's grim too and very dumpy- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ROFLOL...
> Dunno why though, cuz for all her ugly features, she is more
> intelligent than I am & far richer too
> sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

you don't know that is she is more intelligent than you are, she had a
fairly priviledged upbringing and was able to go to a proper school,
university etc and had a lot of things and opportunities you did not,
that is why she is where she is (a QC, married to the ex-PM, and
minted). that is not a sign that she is intelligent, just lucky. You
taught yourself to read and write at a very late age and have come a
long way after suffering some serious educational privation early on
in life when learning such skills is fairly crucial so considering
what you have been without (literacy) and what you have subsequently
achieved I think it is you who is possibly the more intelligent. And I
am always right about everything so don't argue with me on this one.

and she is still ugly and she has no cats, so in the grand scheme of
things i think she is the one who has less.

bookie (who is currently nursing some serious scratch wounds after
giving jessie a damn good combing)

Chief cat salve
July 13th 07, 06:28 PM
On 12 Jul, 17:42, bookie > wrote:
> On 12 Jul, 16:14, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 12 Jul, 14:58, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > On 12 Jul, 01:02, sheelagh > wrote:
>
> > > > On 11 Jul, 23:52, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 11 Jul, 02:50, "chalk" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > "William Graham" > wrote in message
>
> > > > > . ..
>
> > > > > > > "Ivor Jones" > wrote in message
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > >> "William Graham" > wrote in message
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >>> "Sean Black" > wrote in
> > > > > > >>> ...
>
> > > > > > >> [snip]
>
> > > > > > >>> > Nope, what they have in mind is fitting a "black box"
> > > > > > >>> > to every car, tracking when and where it goes and
> > > > > > >>> > charging per mile, at varying rates (depending on type
> > > > > > >>> > of road/time of day etc...) and billingyou. A few
> > > > > > >>> > pence a mile for smaller roads at off-peak times,
> > > > > > >>> > rising to (I've heard) 1.34 (something over $2) per
> > > > > > >>> > mile on motorways at peak times. Leaving aside the whole Big Brother
> > > > > > >>> > aspect of having
> > > > > > >>> > all your movements tracked, if they bring that in at
> > > > > > >>> > those sort of prices, there'll be plenty of people that
> > > > > > >>> > wouldn't be able to afford to go to work, even if they
> > > > > > >>> > wanted to (me included).
>
> > > > > > >>> Taxes on gasoline do the same thing, and much more
> > > > > > >>> easily....Besides, they encourage driving vehicles that
> > > > > > >>> get better mileage, too......The smaller and lighter and
> > > > > > >>> more efficient your vehicle, the lessyouhave to pay,
> > > > > > >>> and this is as it should be, because the less wear and
> > > > > > >>> tear on the roads, and the less pollutionyouemit into
> > > > > > >>> the air, too. Why mess with a system as good as this?
> > > > > > >>> Here in the US, people are still driving their huge SUV's
> > > > > > >>> around, but then gasoline is still very cheap. It was 20 cents a
> > > > > > >>> gallon back in 1950, and now, some 50 years later, when
> > > > > > >>> it should be over $5.00 a gallon, it is still only $3.00
> > > > > > >>> a gallon....So, people are complaining about
> > > > > > >>> nothing........
>
> > > > > > >> Come over here to the UK, it *is* over $5 a gallon, *well* over. Plus we
> > > > > > >> get taxed twice over; once on fuel (current levels approaching
> > > > > > >> 1.00/litre) and once more on "road tax" discs of up to 160/year
> > > > > > >> (depending on emission levels). Now they want to tax us yet again per
> > > > > > >> mile driven.
>
> > > > > > >> (Anyone who thinks that after they've imposed road pricing they'll remove
> > > > > > >> either or both of the other taxes is sadly misguided...)
>
> > > > > > >> Ivor
>
> > > > > > > Yes....That's because GB is basically a socialist state....Be thankful
> > > > > > > that the government doesn't take all of your money away and dribble back
> > > > > > > the food, clothing, and housing that they thinkyoushould have......It
> > > > > > > seems that Robin Hood has become the national norm....
> > > > > > > Not that I am gloating, or anything like that...We are fast becoming
> > > > > > > the same....Hillary would nationalize all the doctors and other health
> > > > > > > personnel and make it a state owned and run industry....Thenyouwill be
> > > > > > > able to choose any doctoryouwant as long as his name is, "---- ----",
> > > > > > > and go to any hospitalyouwant as long as it's "Hillary General".....:^)
>
> > > > > > Worse yet, Hillary learned from her mistakes 14 years ago, when she
> > > > > > failed to impose Hillary-Care on the country. This time around it will
> > > > > > be much more difficult to derail her plans for socialized medicine in
> > > > > > America. When the hell is Fred Thompson going to throw his hat in
> > > > > > the ring? Better yet, American needs Zell Miller to come down out
> > > > > > of the north Georgia mountains and quit fishing his last days away.
> > > > > > America needs the old Georgia marine to fight one more battle for his
> > > > > > country.
>
> > > > > > "Ifyoudon't give our boys the equipment and support they
> > > > > > need to fight, what doyouexpect for them to do, throw spitballs at
> > > > > > the enemy"? - U.S. Senator Zell Miller's reply to the
> > > > > > neo-liberal leftists of CNN when they questioned the military
> > > > > > budget.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > I have to say that I really don't like hillary clinton and I am glad
> > > > > that she is over there withyouand not over here in england and on
> > > > > our tv constantly. Nothing to do with her politics or anything like
> > > > > that it is just that she is an absolute minger, surpassed only by her
> > > > > even uglier daughter in utter vileness. why does she always have an
> > > > > expression on her face as though she is being electrocuted or possibly
> > > > > even taken up the arse from behind?
>
> > > > > she is probably a very lovely woman, a wonderful mother and a highly
> > > > > intelligent member of society but she is just so ****ing ugly, thats
> > > > > all.
>
> > > > > and before anyone has a go about this, remember that we in britain
> > > > > have also suffered; margaret beckett, we know your pain
> > > > > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Not to mention Cherrie Blair, lol
> > > > Now that did give the rags & Sunday mags a field day, didn't it?
> > > > PS: does everyone understand what a minger is here?
> > > > sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > oh yeah i forgot about cherie blair, the woman with a mouth like a
> > > letterbox, she's grim too and very dumpy- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ROFLOL...
> > Dunno why though, cuz for all her ugly features, she is more
> > intelligent than I am & far richer too
> > sheelagh- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> youdon't know that is she is more intelligent thanyouare, she had a
> fairly priviledged upbringing and was able to go to a proper school,
> university etc and had a lot ofthingsand opportunitiesyoudid not,
> that is why she is where she is (a QC, married to the ex-PM, and
> minted). that is not a sign that she is intelligent, just lucky.You
> taught yourself to read and write at a very late age and have come a
> long way after suffering some serious educational privation early on
> in life when learning such skills is fairly crucial so considering
> whatyouhave been without (literacy) and whatyouhave subsequently
> achieved I think it isyouwho is possibly the more intelligent. And I
> am always right about everything so don't argue with me on this one.
>
> and she is still ugly and she has no cats, so in the grand scheme ofthingsi think she is the one who has less.
>
> bookie (who is currently nursing some serious scratch wounds after
> giving jessie a damn good combing)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'll take that as a compliment, Lol;o)
I have to admit that it isn't easy, & I certainly didn't advertise the
fact until I had a basic command over writing basic things and reading
the newspaper.
I bet you would never guess how many people can't read & write you
know!
Most hide it by listening to the news, then buying the newspaper &
looking at the pictures. Very slowly (in my case), you learn to read
the basics, then guesswork comes into play. I would imagine it took me
around 3years in total. I wouldn't wish it upon anybody though. It is
a humiliating thing to have to ask your kids to read out their school
letters.

Also, a lot of the credit lies with my daughter, Kt, who encouraged me
when I wanted to give up & never gave up on me either....

Cherie Blair is a street smart , for want of a better way of finding a
word you can't quite reach. (yes, I do use a thesaurus.. I just
haven't got one handy Lol :o)
She has the gift of the gab shall we say?
Who else do you know of who gets free holidays by borrowing Richard
Bran sons house for a week or two? Set up a fund for underprivileged
children, then spent most of the proceeds on paying her own fee for
doing it for them. Charity definately begins @ home for this clever
lady.. She knows every hook around the laws & uses them to full
advantage.

I don't know whether to admire her for her ingenuity, or condemn her
for her barely law abiding standards double standards.


I wonder if she is still best friends with the bertaconi's?
( sorry for wrong spelling- the ex prime minister of Italy, before the
big scoops landed)...

Very streetwise indeed!
Sheelagh