According to
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/r
p99-111.pdf
life expectancy for a UK male has gone from about 70 to about
75 in between
1981 2011 - say 7,5% increase, I can't find the exact
figures at the moment but productivity per worker over the
same
What was the results of voting on Thursday?
Dr Michael Benjamin,
Community Psychiatrist
They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the
No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there
has been malpractice and awards the
Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be
bothered either way.
How's about a referendum on compulsory voting next time?
On 7 May 2011, at 08:25, Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com wrote:
What was the results of voting on Thursday?
Dr Michael Benjamin,
Were there Local Elections too?
Michael
Dr Michael Benjamin,
Community Psychiatrist
---
myRay: On-line Self-Help CBT
http://www.myRay.com
--
Mental Health:
http//www.MyDoctorExplains.com
Auditing || Quality
An overwhelming majority of voters thought Leeds should be heavily fined and
docked 15 points.
What was the results of voting on Thursday?
Dr Michael Benjamin,
Community Psychiatrist
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
!
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Moran
Sent: 07 May 2011 08:29
To: Dave Sowden
Cc: LEEDS List
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be bothered
either way
...@blueyonder.co.uk
Sender: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 09:09:29
To: 'Jim Moran'j...@jimmoran.co.uk; 'Dave Sowden'davesow...@hotmail.com
Cc: 'LEEDS List'leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
I find compulsory voting an affront to freedom of speech. Or the freedom
...@jimmoran.co.uk;
DaveSowdendavesow...@hotmail.com; LEEDS Listleedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
There can never ever be a bar to voting no matter what the erstwhile 'good '
reason.
The minute you permit anyone to ' define' eligibility then along come someone
else with his
As I said, invest[ment] into productive enterprise - if you are a baker,
you probably won't be able to manually make bread anymore (in economically
significant quantities) once your in your 70s - if though you invest in a
bread making machine with some of your surplus during your productive years
According to
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-111.pdf
life expectancy for a UK male has gone from about 70 to about 75 in between
1981 2011 - say 7,5% increase, I can't find the exact figures at the
moment but productivity per worker over the same period has
Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are
properly funded, and if the funding is invested into
productive enterprise (for want of a better word).
I have to say I couldn't agree less. Contributions make up a small part of
the final pot., it is the predictions of growth,
HEAR HEAR !
Damian Walsh wrote:
PS my first IS job in 1985 was reprogramming pension schemes to allow
premium holes and premium holidays so that the employers contributions
did not have to be paid.
Class Traitor.. :-)
___
: LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
It hurts when you lance a boil, and a boil doesn't kill you, but we all know
that in the long term you're better off having lanced it.
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk
...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Ian Murray
Sent: 03 May 2011 22:52
To: Joe Skinner
Cc: LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
It hurts when you lance a boil, and a boil doesn't kill you, but we all know
that in the long term you're better off having lanced
And Labour's plan to reduce the deficit wouldn't be called slash and burn?
How different was their plan?
But anyway, your analogy about lancing the boil fits very well with the
structural deficit plans over 4, not 5 years. One could argue that Labours
idea to delay the slash and burn by 1 year
But anyway, your analogy about lancing the boil fits very
well with the structural deficit plans over 4, not 5 years.
SNIP
only difference was the timing of and depth of the initial cuts.
trouble is the major cuts aren't really major - despite the real pain that
will be caused to many
Since this long political thread has come round to the subject of The Cuts,
perhaps I could link it back to the original issue.
I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the
so-called wedding, and all the rest of us had to do was stump up the paltry 20
million quid for
Well the 'prancing around on horses' bit is pretty self explanatory as
they are called the Household Cavalry.
As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we are
still being defended by Spitfires, Lancaster Bombers and Typhoons then we
are in the sh*t if someone attacks us
; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Since this long political thread has come round to the subject of The
Cuts, perhaps I could link it back to the original issue.
I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the
so
As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we
are
still being defended by Spitfires, Lancaster Bombers and Typhoons then we
are in the sh*t if someone attacks us ala 1941
We are still very much being defended by Typhoons!
It's what the RAF calls a
PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-)
I only saw the flypast on the news, having spent the day building a bin
store and clearing out loads of rubbish.
As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we
are
still being defended by Spitfires,
On 04/05/2011 11:50, Tim Leslie wrote:
PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-)
I only saw the flypast on the news, having spent the day building a bin
store
Didn't work though did it? They still found him.
___
Leedslist
14:00
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Maybe we can use the cake and pop tax revenue to fill this deficit you seem
so concerned about?
Or no, we have to offset that against the net loss to the economy of
billions caused
@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-)
Ah, you need to get in touch with your inner anorak ;-)
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
http://mailman
-boun...@gn.apc.org
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 11:57:34
To: 'Robert Heath'rhe...@mis-munich.de; 'Richard
Naef'rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Collecting the extra tax revenue from those idiot tourists (from UK and
overseas) who came into town
a shitter.
Indeed.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Murray. [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com]
VSent: 04 May 2011 14:00
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Maybe we can use the cake and pop tax revenue to fill
I can see this is all upsetting you, so I will just say it
doesn't matter what the tories (or libdems) thought about the
deregulation of the financial services sector, Labour did the
deed, no one else. I also don't remember reading any other
chancellor in the developed world claiming
; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
We would have been in a much worse position under the Tories 1997-2008 since
they would have made vast improvements to healthcare, the schooling system,
ema, minimum wage etc etc etc
for adopting your pedantry, the Tories did not get in. They
had to form a coalition to form a government.
From: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk
To: ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com
CC: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk;
leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Date
cuts and to trust their economic nouse, and some people believe him.
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Richard Naef
Sent: 04 May 2011 17:25
To: leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
eh? don't you
On 04/05/2011 14:23, Mark Humphries wrote:
Either way you look at it, it is
Blair/Brown/Darling to blame, not Cameron, not Clegg, not FPTP, not the
Queen and not Ken Bates.
And just how do you know it's not Ken Bates, Mark? Whio knows what shit
the old beardy bastard is dreaming up with his
...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 04 May 2011 17:40
To: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk
Cc: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk;
leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Whereas obviously you're seeing all this through the retrospectoscope.
Hindsight makes prophets of us all
-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 17:55:47 +0100
The benefit of the retrospectoscope is that it’s based on cold hard facts, not
mystical powers. Like the assumption Major wouldn’t have invested in public
services with the economic boom just
Don't worry about anti-lawyer abuse on this list. I think you'll find that
we're all very pro lawyer-abuse here!
Damian ;)
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Ian Murray ianjamesmur...@hotmail.comwrote:
*braces self for anti-lawyer abuse*
___
Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are properly funded,
and if the funding is invested into productive enterprise (for want of a
better word).
Today's problem with Final Salary Pensions is the funding. Public Service
pensions are unfunded with the govt making guarantees out
Morning Ian,
Damian was indeed alluding to the HRA.
snip and the way the judiciary is using it to protect the individual against
the state (as it is designed to do) snip
I think that is a little unfair on the judiciary as it is a broad sweeping
statement with nothing to back it up.
The
Hi Chris, well aware of this. The HRA is the main piece of constitutional
legislation in this country which guarantees the rights of individuals. It is
the most vulnerable people in our society who require it's protection the most
when the executive seeks to erode those rights (as it frequently
.
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Ian Murray
Sent: 02 May 2011 14:12
To: m...@leeds-united.net
Cc: Leeds list; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
So, of all the tourists you bump into on your way to work
Cc: m...@leeds-united.net; Leeds list; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
I do pay for them to swan around. Their travel is paid for out of public funds,
their civil list income is paid for out of public funds. I clearly literally do
pay them money. Why should I? Because their inbred
Ian,
Whilst I agree that the most vulnerable people in society do indeed require
some form of protection, my point that most of the principles included within
the ECHR and then enacted into English law via the HRA were already the
subjects of various acts of parliament is still valid. All the
businessman in the family.
That’s life, I just get on with mine!
-Original Message-
From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 03 May 2011 11:47
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: m...@leeds-united.net; Leeds list; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
I do pay for them
Can't really be arsed to trawl through lawtel and show examples for you but HRA
was a game changer which fundamentally altered the course of our jurisprudence.
All legislation is to be interpreted through the prism of the HRA, and when the
two clash the HRA is supreme. In other words, the
...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 03 May 2011 13:03
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: m...@leeds-united.net; Leeds list; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Right, I rather imagine that this is becoming slightly boring for everyone (me
included), but I have to respond to this email as it is pretty insulting.
You suggest
for some people etc.
I don't really car either way, no one can disprove or not the theory that
they are good for tourism but if you look at this weekend alone, that means
if they're not, then there are at least 1,000,000 stone cold morons!
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
From
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
PS No, sorry, you're right. People come to the UK in the actual expectation
of meeting the Queen and all her little parasitic little children. That's the
only reason and nobody would ever dream of coming here if we got rid if them.
Sorry for getting that so wrong
oh my dear... steve you are not the coldest beer in the fridge when it comes
to UK royal history, thats pretty evident.
Do you know how foreign your royalties are? Who in the royal family is not of
foreign heritage? In fact the french royalties were often close allies in war,
as well as
Just catching up on the parasitology thread.
Have to say that Ian Murray is wiping the floor with the Royalists.
As for the latter, is the spurious fact that the so-called Royals generate a
big tourist income the best argument you can come up with in their favour? Even
if that were provably
viable point you may
have been making
-Original Message-
From: eric Barlier [mailto:barl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 May 2011 14:49
To: Ian Murray
Cc: Steve Gillen; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
oh my dear... steve you are not the coldest beer in the fridge when it
comes to UK
have been making
-Original Message-
From: eric Barlier [mailto:barl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 May 2011 14:49
To: Ian Murray
Cc: Steve Gillen; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
oh my dear... steve you are not the coldest beer in the fridge when it
comes to UK royal history
have been making
-Original Message-
From: eric Barlier [mailto:barl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 May 2011 14:49
To: Ian Murray
Cc: Steve Gillen; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
oh my dear... steve you are not the coldest beer in the fridge when it
comes to UK royal history
@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
So, of all the tourists you bump into on your way to work, or whatever, you
give them a detailed questionnaire of their reasons for visiting the UK?
No? Well in that case how can you say they attract tourists? Are we so lacking
in self confidence
] Good omen?
Just catching up on the parasitology thread.
Have to say that Ian Murray is wiping the floor with the Royalists.
As for the latter, is the spurious fact that the so-called Royals generate a
big tourist income the best argument you can come up with in their favour? Even
if that were
-
From: eric Barlier [mailto:barl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 May 2011 14:49
To: Ian Murray
Cc: Steve Gillen; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
oh my dear... steve you are not the coldest beer in the fridge when it
comes to UK royal history, thats pretty evident.
Do you know how foreign
The know-all was right Betty. I spent quite alot of my hard earned in the far
North. I decided to camp in Glen Nevis and climb the mountain this weekend to
escape all the cr@p. Good few pots of real ale at the end in the Ben Nevis Inn
(or whatever it's called). I can heartily recommend crofters
On 02/05/2011 17:04, Ian Murray wrote:
The know-all was right Betty
Ian those wre reverse groats :-)
Which route did you use for the Beinn? Carn Mor Dearg Ridge is the very
chap!
Betty
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
On 02/05/2011 16:21, Damian Walsh wrote:
our Constitutional Monarchy
perpetuates a system
that allows some gimp to have his wedding up some big church and then a bash
for 600 afterwards whilst there is a strong case for Invergordon Registry
Office and 120
snip ...the judiciary have powers that don't derive from Parliament.snip
Damian,
Could you expand what you mean, I'm curious.
Cheers
Chris
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
On 02/05/2011 17:42, Nicholas Armit wrote:
Sorry, but did all you royalists get 2 days off for the wedding? I thought The
Thatch got rid of the May Bank Holiday...(could be well off base here).
Off base...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/04/may-day-tradition-margaret-thatcher
With an
for your kind words
-Original Message-
From: Eric B [mailto:barl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 May 2011 16:12
To: Steve Gillen
Cc: Ian Murray; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Steve
I have no problem with you. We have in fact met in early 2000s, I met you
and your lovely wife
I think he's talking about the human rights act, and the way the judiciary is
using it to protect the individual against the state (as it is designed to do),
and how our current government is doing it's best to have it repealed and
jumping up and down about how 'Parliament knows best'.
If we
Ive no idea an dont really care.
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Mark Stephenson
Sent: 30 April 2011 20:31
To: 'LEEDSLIST'
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Matt
I think you'll find that that most of the tourists come to look at the old
: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of John Lee
Sent: 30 April 2011 22:51
To: 'Eric B'; 'Steve Gillen'; Mark Humphries
Cc: 'leedslist'; 'Simon Hart'; e...@morrish.org
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
by all means pay for the old bag and Phil the Greek if it's
; Mark Humphries; John Lee;
leedslist; Eric B
Subject: Re: RE: [LU] Good omen?
Yes, thank God for Prince Andrew: drinking with convicted paedophiles so
that you don't have to.
Ed.
On 1 May 2011 11:00, Matt Anderson m...@leeds-united.net wrote:
I would add Prince Andrew into that.
Duke
Hart'; e...@morrish.org
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
by all means pay for the old bag and Phil the Greek if it's to support
tourism, but all those bloody chancers with their snouts in the trough as
well? I think not!
--- On Sat, 30/4/11, Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote
-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Mark Stephenson
Sent: 30 April 2011 20:31
To: 'LEEDSLIST'
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Matt
I think you'll find that that most of the tourists come to look at the old
houses of the current royal family's dead relatives.
If anyone thinks that this is a good basis
100%
If you want a republic, there are countries you can go to..
-Original Message-
From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 01 May 2011 16:32
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: Mark Stephenson; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
She has no say constitutionally? Sure about
: 01 May 2011 20:40
To: 'Ian Murray'
Cc: 'LEEDSLIST'
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
100%
If you want a republic, there are countries you can go to..
-Original Message-
From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 01 May 2011 16:32
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: Mark Stephenson; LEEDSLIST
I thought the original point was whether QE2 wearing Yellow and Blue was a good
omen. Well, she did, and we won, so was it?
How do we get her to wear it every week? Another letter to Lord Harewood?
Cheers
Paul
Steve G wrote:
Which neatly beings us back to my original point - or what I was
...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
100%
If you want a republic, there are countries you can go to..
-Original Message-
From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 01 May 2011 16:32
To: Mark Humphries
Cc: Mark Stephenson; LEEDSLIST
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
She has
They have wormer weather and better food than us, hence more visitors,
France is the most visited country on earth and they did to their royalty
what we should have done centuries ago.
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
People go to Paris for the weather?
Sent from my iPhone
On 1 May 2011, at 21:52, Steve Gillen steve.gil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
They have wormer weather and better food than us, hence more visitors,
France is the most visited country on earth and they did to their royalty
what we
PS No, sorry, you're right. People come to the UK in the actual expectation of
meeting the Queen and all her little parasitic little children. That's the only
reason and nobody would ever dream of coming here if we got rid if them. Sorry
for getting that so wrong.
Sent from my iPhone
On 1 May
When you get a serial rapist as president, not to mention a whole list of
degenerates in other places, having one family bearing, bringing up and
training from birth a sovereign not to be a complete dangerous arsehole has a
few attractions.
The best thing to be said about monarchy is that
At least we'd get to vote for em. The very concept that someone is seen as
being better and more important than someone else by virtue of their ancestors
killing more folk is completely and utterly perverse.
It won't last for that much longer.
Sent from my iPhone
On 1 May 2011, at 22:11, Dr.
...@gn.apc.org
Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 22:03:14
To: Steve Gillensteve.gil...@ntlworld.com
Cc: LEEDSLISTleedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
PS No, sorry, you're right. People come to the UK in the actual expectation of
meeting the Queen and all her little parasitic little children. That's the only
...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Eric B
Sent: 30 April 2011 09:11
To: Steve Gillen
Cc: leedslist; e...@morrish.org; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
yeah Steve but you fucked up by having a go at the french. Read up on your
royal history mate.
I'm with Mr Heath on this one and I wouldn't call
]
On
Behalf Of Eric B
Sent: 30 April 2011 09:11
To: Steve Gillen
Cc: leedslist; e...@morrish.org; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
yeah Steve but you fucked up by having a go at the french. Read up on
your
royal history mate.
I'm with Mr Heath on this one and I wouldn't call Germany
...@googlemail.com] o
Sent: 30 April 2011 19:28
To: m...@leeds-united.net
Cc: Mark Humphries; leedslist; Simon Hart; e...@morrish.org
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Matt,
Where's the evidence for the that figure? I'm always told the Royal Family
are a net financial benefit to the UK, but no-one has
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
To: 'Eric B' barl...@gmail.com, 'Steve Gillen' steve.gil...@ntlworld.com
Cc: 'leedslist' leedslist@gn.apc.org, 'Simon Hart'
simon.h...@york.ac.uk, e...@morrish.org
Date: Saturday, 30 April, 2011, 15:28
The old bag was smiling yesterday, that was actually the best part
Ken Bates there?
Sent from my iPad
Dr. Michael Benjamin
Community Psychiatrist
On Apr 29, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Robert Heath rhe...@mis-munich.de wrote:
I note that the Chief Parasite is wearing yellow with a blue rug to keep her
precious knees warm.
How disgracefully rude. Fine, if you don't like or approve of the Royal
family, you have every right to think so, but to use expressions like that
is out of order on a day when those of us who don't think as you do are
enjoying the occasion.
_
From: Robert Heath
I think that living in Munchen Rob probably just doesn't like Germans very
much.
Damian
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Steve Gillen steve.gil...@ntlworld.comwrote:
How disgracefully rude. Fine, if you don't like or approve of the Royal
family, you have every right to think so, but to use
If I were to tell you what I really think about those people...that
would be rude.
_
From: Steve Gillen [mailto:steve.gil...@ntlworld.com]
To: 'Robert Heath' [mailto:rhe...@mis-munich.de], 'Jim Moran'
[mailto:j...@jimmoran.co.uk], e...@morrish.org
Cc: 'leedslist'
Not disgraceful at all. Parasite is the kindest word I can think of to describe
for them.
We need constitutional protection from Parliament, proper democracy, an elected
head of state and for these born to rule toffs to get jobs.
Up the Republic.
I
Sent from my iPhone
On 29 Apr 2011, at
Not disgraceful at all. Parasite is the kindest word I can think of to describe
for that set of fucking thieves.
We need constitutional protection from Parliament, proper democracy, an elected
head of state and for these born to rule toffs to get jobs.
Up the Republic.
I
Sent from my iPhone
Ps tried to cancel and tone it down a bit but didn't work, clearly. Sorry for
anyone whose filter picked up the deletive expletive. Hope you're enjoying the
sandwiches Steve. :)
Sent from my iPhone
On 29 Apr 2011, at 11:42, Steve Gillen steve.gil...@ntlworld.com wrote:
How disgracefully
Politics for all or none.
From recent events we have seen that for all is a non starter.
So my vote is for none.
In short let's stick to football.
Michael
Sent from my iPad
Dr. Michael Benjamin
Community Psychiatrist
On Apr 29, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ian Murray ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com wrote:
Benjamin [mailto:beden...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29 April 2011 16:11
To: Ian Murray
Cc: Steve Gillen; leedslist; e...@morrish.org; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Politics for all or none.
From recent events we have seen that for all is a non starter.
So my vote is for none.
In short let's stick
Come on Steve , don't get ruffled by Mr Heath- he left our great country years
ago and now lives in the 3rd world somewhere.
I'm no fan of the Royals but bloody he'll it was good to see that we can put on
an occasion like today. Absolutely bloody marvellous and makes us the envy of
the world
Je suis mortellement offendé par ce slur sur la Patrie - qui, d'ailleur a
fourni la Royauté de l'Angleterre pendent 750 ans avant ces Boches actuelles
ont pris le relai.
Ca demande une rencontre Monsieur! Par tradition soit Marble Arch à Londres
soit les Champs de Mars à Paris. A vous a decidé
Six heures lundi matin aux pistolets!
Pistolets? Why not a proper bloody pistol Walsh instead of a girly one!
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options:
Aye, righto old love, ths's on
-Original Message-
From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Damian Walsh
Sent: 29 April 2011 19:07
To: leedslist
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Je suis mortellement offendé par ce slur sur la Patrie - qui
Excellent reply Richard - I thank you for it
-Original Message-
From: Richard Walker [mailto:richleed...@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: 29 April 2011 18:52
To: Robert Heath
Cc: Steve Gillen; Jim Moran; e...@morrish.org; leedslist; Simon Hart
Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen?
Come on Steve , don't get
93 matches
Mail list logo
