GazeboflossUK

Errm, it's over now.

AND HERE'S SOME INFO TO GO WITH THE NEW EVIDENCE THAT'S SPARKING THE NEW ATTACK ON THE PENTAGON COVER-UP!! http://www.coldplaying.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1992197&postcount=489

You gotta see this... The PentaCon (Smoking Gun Version) Watch it Website Here

A Virgin Pendolino train has derailed and slid down an embankment in Cumbria, witnesses say. Nine carriages were left on their side, with some "stuck up in the air", passengers said. RAF helicopters, police and fire crews have been sent. More here..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6391633.stm

Yeah, I remember when this story first broke. I actually meant to write that it was a returning story. In London I fell victim to fly tipping. My back garden was used as a dump for full trees, paving stones and other rubbish. It wasn't hard to work out that my new neighbours were to blame as I obviously could see into their garden where they had removed all the stones, dirt, trees, plastic shed windows and asbestos tiles. I got angry (but I didn't show it) as they just ignored me and played dumb - saying that they couldn't understand English very well (which I knew was a 100% lie). They tried to accuse me of racism after I said that I know it's a popular thing around here for families from the middle-east to do (tarmac over the garden) but it does not mean that they could just dump it onto my property. The police got involved and they played the racism card again....which was complete crap. I simply pointed out all the other gardens that had been paved over since I started living there and that I didn't see those people (Asian & Polish) dump their rubbish on others - so why should they do it to me. It was an completely valid point. Anyway, after all the shouting by my neighbours and the calm common sense by myself we ended up finding out that they didn't want to pay a large fee to the council for them to come and take it all away. The Police then told my neighbours to clear it all up and to either burn all the stuff or pay up. That's right - Burn it all! This of course was exactly what happened and I then suffered 2 weeks of extremely dodgy fires with even more dodgy smoke that filtered through my house. The streets were terraced so it was close. The Police weren't much use as they were the ones who suggested the stupid idea and all attempts to ask them to move the fire away slightly just ended up with my neighbours shouting rubbish about how the police know about it and it's all alright. I had lost patience and I was very glad that I actually was moving from the area within a month. Ok, "personal story of the day, which nobody really needs to know" is over.

US Iran intelligence 'is incorrect' Julian Borger London Guardian Thursday, February 22, 2007 Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by US spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, diplomatic sources in Vienna said today. The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme. That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohammed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran and raises the possibility that the US could resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites. At the heart of the debate are accusations - spearheaded by the US - that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons. However, most of the tip-offs about supposed secret weapons sites provided by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have led to dead ends when investigated by IAEA inspectors, according to informed sources in Vienna. "Most of it has turned out to be incorrect," a diplomat at the IAEA with detailed knowledge of the agency's investigations said. "They gave us a paper with a list of sites. [The inspectors] did some follow-up, they went to some military sites, but there was no sign of [banned nuclear] activities. "Now [the inspectors] don't go in blindly. Only if it passes a credibility test." http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2019235,00.html

.........and not the type of Chips you get with Fish! Some Britons up in arms over `Bin Brother' Liz Ruskin McClatchy Newspapers Thursday, February 22, 2007 LONDON - The British tolerate millions of surveillance cameras watching their every public move. They agreed to let roadside cameras record their vehicular movements and store the information for two years. But when they discovered that their garbage is being bugged, they howled that Big Brother had gone too far. Local governments have attached microchips to some 500,000 "wheelie bins," the trashcans that residents wheel to the curb for collection. The aim, they say, is to help monitor collections and boost the national recycling rate, now among the lowest in Europe. The public has reacted with suspicion and fury. "Germans Plant Bugs in Our Wheelie Bins," a Daily Mail headline announced in August. Two of the bin manufacturers are German. Newspaper letter writers have taken to calling it "Bin Brother." Small-scale revolts have erupted across the United Kingdom for months, as different localities adopt the technology. Some towns failed to mention the new feature, which is concealed under coin-sized plugs under the rims of their garbage cans. In the coastal city of Bournemouth, 72-year-old Cyril Baker ripped the chip off his new bin the day he discovered it, then went on national television to show how he did it. Thousands of his neighbors followed his example. "It was a very emotional issue. The whole town was in an uproar," he said. "I think people really see this as an intrusion into their personal space," said Bournemouth councilman Nick King, a champion of the anti-chip cause. Residents also fear that the little bug will nip them in the wallet. The microchips - radio frequency identification transmitters known as RFID tags - can't actually spy on the contents of a bin. They're more like tiny digital nametags, but they hold lots of information and can be scanned from yards away. Bournemouth administrators swear that they intend only to monitor trash trends and return lost bins to their assigned homes. Other cities said they wanted to identify heavy heapers to advise them on better rubbish management. But residents suspect a plan to levy charges for garbage hauling, and some local officials have acknowledged that's their long-term aim. The Orwellian aspect has been blown out of proportion, chip supporters say. "People think it's Big Brother watching them, and it's not. It's a system for weighing rubbish," said David Peel, the communications manager for South Norfolk Council, which has a bin chip project under way. Civil libertarians worry about a day when every object has an embedded RFID tag, and people don't know who's tracking their trash. Put this technology in the hands of sanitation workers and it won't stop at just weighing the garbage, predicts Chris McDermott, an anti-RFID activist. "Before you know it, they'll be scanning the actual products, wrappers and other detritus that you throw away inside the bin, as these are also scheduled to be RFID-enabled in the near future," he warns on his Web site, www.notags.co.uk. Not likely, said Andy Shaw, the business manager of Cambridge Auto-ID Lab, a university research center that's developing new uses for radio frequency tags. The lab, according to its Web site, is creating a system that will enable computers to identify "any object anywhere in the world instantly." But Shaw thinks, "nobody is going to pay to put readers onto garbage trucks that can read everything. It's just too expensive." Anyway, Big Brother doesn't have to resort to scanning your garbage to know what you own, not with store loyalty cards and credit cards so abundant, Shaw joked. As the furor grows over microchips in rubbish barrels, cameras are proliferating. In Bournemouth, Liberal Democrats battle Conservatives over who's done more to expand camera surveillance. The city, with a population of 164,000, operates more than 75 cameras in the town center. Jim Klegg, Bournemouth's street enforcement manager, announced this month that film footage will be used to help prosecute for littering, "which includes dropping cigarette butts and chewing gum," he said. How to explain the enthusiasm for a vast and expanding network of cameras? King, the Bournemouth representative, said the experience of being monitored is rather British. "Inherently, we're quite happy to be watched when we're out and about, because we feel if someone is watching us they can help us," he said. "But there's a line we draw around the home." Kate Fox, a London anthropologist who studies the English, sees it that way, too. Surveillance may seem futuristic, but she maintains that it re-creates, in the English mind, the modern equivalent of the pre-industrial hamlet, where neighbors knew one another's business. "We rather like that sense that we're being looked after," she said. "It makes us feel secure." Yet when it concerns the home, the English are obsessed with privacy, she said, and microchipping the wheelie bins must seem like a breach of the moat. "The Englishman's home really is his castle, and I guess our rubbish bin is part of it," she said.

I often see them, although I live much closer to Scotland I guess. Sometimes places try and tell you that they aren't legal in England! Idiots.

Honestly, I've never seen or read anything by him. Heard of him though. I used to always see a live stand-up audio CD in my local library. But a quick Google search revealed why you asked. :)

Completely not related to what you said BUT..... Your birthday is the same as mine. We had hot lecturers at Uni - mostly the vocal coaches. The rest were men and mostly fat.

Ahh, forget it. It appears it's just Internet Explorer 7.....I just tried Firefox, then tried Internet Explorer again and it's all working fine. Hey Vi.

Hey, can you see my last post?.......I can't - but if I try and post it again it says "it is a duplicate of a previous post". anyway....

Actual word censoring makes almost no sense AT all. Example - the word SHIT being used to describe Faeces is completely legitimate and is even in the dictionary but is somehow a "swear" word. However the word POO is publicly allowed (by who exactly?) as a synonym of Faeces - as are DUNG, TURD, POOP and CRAP which oddly is sometimes debatable (huh?). So saying "Woah! It smells like Faeces in there!" is completely fine. Ok. and saying "Woah man! It smells like Dung in there!" is also acceptable. saying "I'm not going in there again, it smells of Poo!" is again widely accepted to be fine. Now if you say "Oh *cough, cough* it really does smell like Crap in there" you'll should be fine but not always...huh? Strange. And if you utter "Ohh, Jeff, it really stinks of Shit in there, keep out!" it's seen as vulgar - when in fact it is exactly the same as the others! Shit, as used above, is 100% in context yet somehow it's considered to be a "bad" word. It's absolutely non-sensical. If you work by the silly logic that exists today then using various synonyms is "wrong" because some people don't like the sound? Using words out of context is also sometimes thought a problem....however if I use the word Poo out of context it's alright? If I'm in public or on radio or television and say "You're kidding me Jeff, right? You like the scissor sisters? They are Poo!" it's not thought of as a "swear" word or the sentence is not in bad taste - but substitute Shit into sentence and it certainly would. Says who? Say some idiots I think. It can of course be observed that using these words in such a way shows a lack of vocabulary and more useful, descriptive efforts pave the way for greater understanding. So, the only way word censoring can even be argued is that if such words are used wrongly or out of context (or in a sexually and aggressive way) That's the meat and potatoes of it.

I guess this can go here as it refers to Iran...saves making a new thread. Why is Blair pulling Iraq troops out? Tartan Hero Thursday, February 22, 2007 Top of the headlines today is of course, Tony Bliar's announcement that he is cutting the number of British troops in Iraq. Some might say he is heeding the SNP's call to bring our troops home at last. Others may be less charitable. One theory doing the rounds in journalistic circles is a far more worrying scenario. What if the real reason that British troops are being brought out of Iraq was because UK military and government leaders know of plans by the US to bomb Tehran (or its nuclear research stations). Today's announcementby Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that Iran will try to achieve nuclear capability as soon as possible, is sending shivers down the ersatz-spines of Washington's White House, State Department and Pentagon. My money is on the US military-industrial complex conspirators to make a 'pre-emptive strike' a la Clinton on Libya in Spring next year. UPDATE: Check out this opinion from an ex-US air force colonel, courtesy of the British American Security Information Council.

John Cleese's Letter to America :) To the citizens of the United States of America In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories (except Kansas , which she does not fancy), as from Monday next. Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect: 1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium," and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. 2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'colour', 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters, and the suffix "ize" will be replaced by the suffix "ise." 3. You will learn that the suffix 'burgh' is pronounced 'burra'; you may elect to respell Pittsburgh as 'Pittsberg' if you find you simply can't cope with correct pronunciation. 4. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up "vocabulary"). Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. 5. There is no such thing as " US English." We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of "-ize." 6. You will relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out Task #1 (see above). 7. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday. November 2nd will be a new national holiday, but to be celebrated only in England . It will be called "Come-Uppance Day." 8. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. 9. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public. 10. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean. 11. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric immediately and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour. 12. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling "gasoline") - roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it. 13. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called "crisps." Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with mayonnaise but with vinegar. 14. Waiters and waitresses will be trained to be more aggressive with customers. 15. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as "beer," and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as "Lager." American brands will be referred to as "Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine," so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion. 16. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie MacDowell attempt English dialogue in "Four Weddings and a Funeral" was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater. 17. You will cease playing American "football." There is only one kind of proper football; you call it "soccer". Those of you brave enough will, in time, will be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies). 18. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the "World Series" for a game which is not played outside of America . Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. 19. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad. 20. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due backdated to 1776. Thank you for your co-operation. John Cleese

Ah, Fucking Spam. Site is turning into a joke - and not a very good one. And yes - get to bed all you little children. :)

http://www.worldwidewank.com/synonyms.html

Between A and B to be precise

It annoys me to think that many, many girls all over the world feel this way. We all know what has caused such problems to escalate.

Well, if you don't confront them or at least one member of your family, they will continue to say such things won't they? You wan't them to stop? If it indeed is that bad then you have to say something. And if they say they are 'just kidding' - then they probably really are BUT.... You say that you would really like it if they did not make the remakes because for whatever reason it is having an effect on you and they need to know that.

The Lounge is full of horse shit. That's exactly what I'm thinking.

I'm not a fan of talking in such threads....but... I think the best idea is tell just tell your family to stop it - if it's making you feel uncomfortable and also making you attempt to throw up. You already know the answer when you said - i'm not fat or anything (even if... where's the problem?) Just talk to them because it's far more useful than talking about it on here, trust me.

BBC Discredited; Retractions on 9/11 Hit Piece Forthcoming? Complaint responses suggest consternation within corporation on revelations of bias in Conspiracy Files documentary, indicates large number of complaints received Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones Prison Planet Wednesday, February 21, 2007 The BBC's response to complaints made against the bias and inaccuracy of the 9/11 Conspiracy Files documentary suggests that an overwhelming backlash has caused considerable consternation at the network and possible retractions or apologies may be forthcoming, with BBC bosses potentially fearing the company's credibility has been tarnished. Following the airing of the show on Sunday evening, numerous websites representative of the 9/11 truth movement issued precise and detailed rebuttals to what many saw as nothing more than an outright hit piece that used crass emotional manipulation, concocted evidence and cynical bias in an attempt to dismiss questions about the official story behind 9/11. Appearing on the Alex Jones show on Monday, the show's producer Guy Smith offered little to defend against allegations that the program represented nothing more than yellow journalism and an attempt to create a strawman argument in the interests of debunking 9/11 skeptics. From what can be gleaned from how the BBC is treating complaints made against the show, it seems that the backlash has forced the complaints to be passed up the chain of command and that the overwhelming response is forcing bosses to consider whether it might be necessary to issue retractions or clarifications in an attempt to calm the furore. Here's the BBC's standard response to complaints being made about the Conspiracy Files program. Thank you for contacting the BBC. This is to let you know that we are dealing with your recent complaint but are waiting to clarify some points with other colleagues in the BBC before we reply more fully to you. We will of course respond as soon as possible but trust you will understand that the time taken can also depend on the nature and number of the other complaints we are currently investigating. The BBC also issues public responses to issues which prompt large numbers of significant complaints and these can be read on our website at www.bbc.co.uk/complaints We would be grateful if you would not reply to this email and, in the meantime, would like to thank you for contacting us with details of your concerns. Regards BBC Information Because the BBC is funded solely through taxpaying British citizens via their TV license fee, the corporation is obliged to issue retractions and apologies if complaints about a particular broadcast are high. On most occasions, they are at least forced to clarify their position on their editor's blog website. 9/11 truth websites across the spectrum are encouraging readers to make complaints and so it's safe to speculate that the BBC has been inundated with them. There have been numerous instances where BBC investigative programs have had to issue retractions and apologies due to faulty research or deliberate bias, a notable example being a 1999 Horizons documentary which sought to debunk the research of controversial archeologist Graham Hancock. An investigation upheld Hancock's complaint that his response to debunkers was not included in the show, and the BBC had to air the re-edited documentary. The BBC divides complaints into four different categories - accuracy, bias, taste/standards and other. Since the Conspiracy Files farce displayed overwhelming inaccuracy in several claims it made, most notably the "pancake collapse" animation which even official NIST authorities have backed away from, and also betrayed patent bias in pitting thirteen debunkers against just three 9/11 skeptics, while ridiculing the character of the skeptics by means of false accusations and stereotyping, it fits into at least two of these categories. We must push now for a retraction, an apology, or at the very least a clarification from the BBC in regards to this blatant hit piece. The basis for our accusations that the program was a hit piece are documented here and here. Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml and select "make an official complaint." Please be as polite as possible and remember that the person reading your complaint will most likely have no connection to the production of the hit piece. Be clear and concise in your complaint, and stick to the facts about the bias and inaccuracy of the program. If the BBC are forced to respond to the backlash, it will deter other networks and producers from creating malicious hit pieces designed to discredit the 9/11 truth movement in future.

What are you on about?

To clarify.....this really isn't a club. Is it? The "clubbers" will probably hi-jack it and call it so though. So this isn't a club. Unless of course it IS and therefore I'm jumping right back out again....with both feet. :) Still hate silly clubbers though. Idiots. :) So, that's it.