Moving to Bath, perchance? -- | ___ Salad Dodger |/ \ _/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/KH500A8/TS250C |_\_____/_| ..66073../..15556.../..Ebay./.Ebay. (>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 YTC#4 PM#5 |__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 two#11 WG* \ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4 \|^|/ ANORAK#17 '^' RBR-Visited:35 Pts: 705 Miles:2429
Eh? Anyone can say anything they like, except for when they're not allowed to? Hardly anything to crow about, is it? ITYF doing stuff without prosecution, as long as it's not against the law, is fairly uniform practice. It was hardly a "Bill of Rights" for the common man, though, was it? to quote the Royal Family website... "The Bill was designed to ensure Parliament could function free from royal interference. The Sovereign was forbidden from suspending or dispensing with laws passed by Parliament, or imposing taxes without Parliamentary consent. The Sovereign was not allowed to interfere with elections or freedom of speech, and proceedings in Parliament were not to be questioned in the courts or in any body outside Parliament itself. (This was the basis of modern parliamentary privilege.) The Sovereign was required to summon Parliament frequently (the Triennial Act of 1694 reinforced this by requiring the regular summoning of Parliaments). Parliament tightened control over the King's expenditure; the financial settlement reached with William and Mary deliberately made them dependent upon Parliament, as one Member of Parliament said, 'when princes have not needed money they have not needed us'. Finally, the King was forbidden to maintain a standing army in time of peace without Parliament's consent. The Bill of Rights added further defences of individual rights. The King was forbidden to establish his own courts or to act as a judge himself, and the courts were forbidden to impose excessive bail or fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. However, the Sovereign could still summon and dissolve Parliament, appoint and dismiss Ministers, veto legislation and declare war." -- | ___ Salad Dodger |/ \ _/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/KH500A8/TS250C |_\_____/_| ..66073../..15556.../..Ebay./.Ebay. (>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 YTC#4 PM#5 |__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 two#11 WG* \ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4 \|^|/ ANORAK#17 '^' RBR-Visited:35 Pts: 705 Miles:2429
I reckon Milan probably _does_ have more in common with Manchester, or maybe Birmingham than it does with Rome, language aside.
It is in Britain, yes, which demonstrates the freedoms of expression you are taking for granted. As you know you can post just about anything here and get away with it. Watch this: "Tony Blair is a **** and fucks the Queen up the shitter". See? Try something similar in Australia, Belgium, France or Germany and you may just get your collar felt if they can track you down. Following an international summit in 1996 these countries opted for online censorship under a variety of pretexts ranging from "pornography" to "terrorism" and "incorrect political opinion". You saw them in action during the France vs Yahoo court case. However another summit earlier this year in Paris extends this online censorship throughout the EU. We may be safe at the moment but as the screw tightens online expression of Euroscepticism may become a thing of the past. No doubt you would consider that a good idea. Well what did you expect, a line inserted about the right to wear flat caps and eat jam butties every Sunday? Like the Magna Carta the Bill Of Rights assured the handing of power from the sovereign to a parliament of the people. True, in those times the common man had no vote but that was pretty much the same the world over. Although there were no lefties in 1698 parliament did concern itself with the rights of ordinary people. You should still remember it was parliament that, for example, abolished slavery. The freedoms you enjoy today were granted by parliament. It was parliament that eventually gave the vote to the common man, and woman. Those ancient documents assured certain rights and freedoms to all inhabitants of this country - natural justice for the Common Man and the right to trial by jury, the principles of Habeas Corpus where a man is innocent until proven guilty, and protection within these islands from foreign powers. These rights are precious, they are our birthright, yet we are giving them up in blind faith that a faceless beaurocrasy of corrupt and unelected foreign officials can do a better job. riccip
Had a lovely Ostritch roast the other week - I didn't believe the cooking instructions which said something like 15 minutes for a kilo, but in retrospect it would have been even better somewhat less cooked - I'd been using a meat thermometer and made the mistake of asssuming it wanted to be at least as hot as 'beef, medium'[1], whereas in fact it seems like it was probably perfectly cooked much lower than that, perhaps as low as 55deg. Anyway, it was really tender and lean, not at all salty, and went well with the port-fortified gravy we made with its juices. Lovely, it was. [1] 65deg, IIRC.
Hooray, he's still here! And still posting absolute drivel! Means I'll be laughing all day today too Anyway, as I've been living in Euro-land since before the new currency was introduced, and still have capital in the UK, I've been making a point of following exchange rate fluctuations. Read the following and learn something. The pound/Euro plot since 01/01 goes something like this (not a terribly accurate rendition, scale-wise, but it shows the trends), starting at about 1.6 Euros/£ and currently at about 1.5. The lowest point about a year ago was less than 1.4, and the highest point 6 months after introduction was 1.67. /\ / \ _ _ _ - / \_ _ - - - \ \ /\ | _ - \ \ \ /\ /\ \ / \-/\/ \ /\ / \_/ \ _ / \ - - So yeah, it's quite clear that the pounds a much better long-term bet than the euro, right.
Aye. As I understand it, it's pretty much the same everywhere. The initial 'change them at any bank' period varied, but they're still duty bound to honour all the old currencies - like old UK stuff, it will never cease to be legal tender.
Me too. I suspect it's the more unpleasant end of being 'in-service' where it was quite common for permission to marry having to be sought from the Master (often denied) and compensation to be made in the event of leaving service.
Ben Blaney bored us all completely to death with wittery prose along the lines of: <G> Get yourself a frog keyboard. Then you can tap away to your hearts content. Bloody annoying when you want to tap numbers though as you have to hit "shift" all the time. Thank God for number pads. Also when you chop and change between English/US and French keyboards. Prolly the same for Paul Carmichael. BTW, you got my last email with my contact details, I hope? -- Cab :^) - almost as fast as Ginge. GSX 1400 - 'Tarts Handbag' (tm) Bike, dead 550/4 Rat UKRMMA#10 (KoTL), IbW#015, Bob#4, POTM#3 P.S. Remove your_head from the cab. ICQ: 83023471
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Mate, could I be so cheeky as to ask you to drop that bit only my newsreader is scoring all your posts as if they were replies to me, and I really can't be bothered re-writing my news scoring rules. <g>
Or just memorise the most common one's ascii codes and use alt+numpad. S'wot I do. 130=é 138=è 136=ê 131=â 133=à 149=ò 135=ç (not that most froggies bother)
