• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

johnola said:
GHod knows what sort of bureaucracy they will set up to administer that.

1000’s more civil servants gobbling up all the savings.
Click to expand...
I. You can't demand process change but not be prepared for the admin - and that isn't free
II. At present it is via HMRC recovery
III. I expect it be partly at the point of annuity payment and, for those with other funds, via either a claim process to DWP or a recovery process via HMRC.
IV. The previous solution avoids your issue - link it solely to an existing means tested benefit
V. It was always going to be a trap for the next government when the Tories set it up - indeed, pretty sure I said so in this thread
 
monkeybarry said:
I. You can't demand process change but not be prepared for the admin - and that isn't free
II. At present it is via HMRC recovery
III. I expect it be partly at the point of annuity payment and, for those with other funds, via either a claim process to DWP or a recovery process via HMRC.
IV. The previous solution avoids your issue - link it solely to an existing means tested benefit
V. It was always going to be a trap for the next government when the Tories set it up - indeed, pretty sure I said so in this thread
Click to expand...

What is all this?
 
johnola said:
I didn’t demand process change and winter fuel allowance has been around for decades.

But it was easily administered.

Now it isn’t.
Click to expand...
You bemoaned the likely creation of the mythical creation of "1000s of civil servants" to administer the change to winter fuel allowance.
I laid how that is a ridiculous statement and the delivery options available.

I may, however, have misunderstood your position - you seem to believe winter fuel payments should be a universal benefit, rather than means testing it so it supports those that need support and doesn't give public funds to people that can afford bills without it.
 
monkeybarry said:
You bemoaned the likely creation of the mythical creation of "1000s of civil servants" to administer the change to winter fuel allowance.
I laid how that is a ridiculous statement and the delivery options available.

I may, however, have misunderstood your position - you seem to believe winter fuel payments should be a universal benefit, rather than means testing it so it supports those that need support and doesn't give public funds to people that can afford bills without it.
Click to expand...

It’s your reply that is ridiculous.

How do you means test something and get cash into pockets of pensioners at the point when they need it ?

Previously it was distributed along with state pension to all - it was straightforward.

It’s a paper tiger and will need a lot of admin bods. Do they look at last years tax return? Is that fair?

And furthermore this is nothing to do with the Tories.
 
Last edited:
johnola said:
It’s your reply that is ridiculous.

How do you means test something and get cash into pockets of pensioners at the point when they need it ?

Previously it was distributed along with state pension to all - it was straightforward.

It’s a paper tiger and will need a lot of admin bods. Do they look at last years tax return? Is that fair?

And furthermore this is nothing to do with the Tories.
Click to expand...
My reply actually addresses the issues you've just stated - that makes it rather less than ridiculous.

So, your position is that all pensioners should get the payment and it not be means tested?

It is nothing to do with the Tories - I was mistaken and confusing it with something else.
 
monkeybarry said:
My reply actually addresses the issues you've just stated - that makes it rather less than ridiculous.

So, your position is that all pensioners should get the payment and it not be means tested?

It is nothing to do with the Tories - I was mistaken and confusing it with something else.
Click to expand...
it was based on some incorrect assumptions that I unwisely tried to backfill and am not going to continue to do so.

You seem to have enough fun making up your own assumptions facts and then running them through your conceits - so don’t get me involved.
 
kb 1984 said:
Do you think they attacked Iran so everyone stopped looking at Gaza. Why attack now it just seems odd especially as Iran is talking to United states about nuclear agreement.
Click to expand...

For whatever reason they are beyond the pale now, Iran don't come to play and Netty has opened himself and his people up to real danger now. I mean he could indiscriminately do what he liked to Palestine and there is little they could do back in terms of this kind of scale.

His keenness to etch himself into the history books has unfortunately put Israel in to an great position of peril........absolute nut job
 
Last edited:
Silly McSilly Face said:
Depends what munitions and assets they used in the strikes. If they used F35s carrying precision guided munitions then they'll be able to accurately targer to within a metre
Click to expand...
That works....as long as they identify correctly what is where within a facility. Is that obvious/are there giveaways?
Or is there an element that they don't really give a fudge?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
That works....as long as they identify correctly what is where within a facility. Is that obvious/are there giveaways?
Or is there an element that they don't really give a fudge?
Click to expand...
I mean the main problem will be that yeah, you can target the nuclear facility to within a metre but realistically if you want to ensure its permanently out of action (or at least destroyed enough to be out of action for a good while), you've got to assume Iran will have used reinforced materials in these facilities and therefore the warhead theyll have used despite being precision will likely have used a force required to destroy a reinforced and armoured structure - let's be brutally honest - that force is going to flatten and set fire to everything within a good radius. That's the issue with "precision" targeting of military apparatus located near to civilian infrastructure.....the sort of sh*t you need to destroy a military building is going to unleash the equivalent of an off the scale earth quake and fire storm on the surrounding area....these "bunker busting" weapons essentially penetrate through the building and embed into the very ground itself before detonating and it explodes the ground upwards and takes everything on top out. It's a reason why Geneva convention is that military and military-target assets shouldn't be placed near to civilian infrastructure - in a war nearby civilian assets are going just be evaporated in the collateral explosions

Reality though is it is a known Iranian doctrine to have military assets embedded within civilian infrastructure. As is Hezbollah and Hamas and all Iran's proxies. Thats why any military operation in Gaza was always going to turn into a blood bath. Military doctrine is if you're taking fire from a building, you take the building out. You dont storm the building- if theres fire coming from it, its likely trapped to sh*t and full of hostiles. You call in an air strike, you use artillery or a tank or at worse a shoulder mounted missile or rocket and you bring the whole thing down before continuing on your merry way......
 
Last edited:
johnola said:
it was based on some incorrect assumptions that I unwisely tried to backfill and am not going to continue to do so.

You seem to have enough fun making up your own assumptions facts and then running them through your conceits - so don’t get me involved.
Click to expand...
"GHod knows what sort of bureaucracy they will set up to administer that.

1000’s more civil servants gobbling up all the savings."

"How do you means test something and get cash into pockets of pensioners at the point when they need it ?

Previously it was distributed along with state pension to all - it was straightforward."

--------

So yeah - it was detailed today that it will be administered via the existing tax system.

That'll make me.....correct
That make you.... taking utter bollox based on your prejudices towards the political incumbents

Re; making assumptions - nope.
Deductions based upon on the evidence and then asking the relevant questions to clarify. It's how intelligence debate works.
Avoiding answering basic questions when they are posed and relevant to the concerns you've raised - that'll be gaslighting.
 
The CPS are shocking.

This is an absolute shocker and both the police and CPS should be ashamed this case ever came to court.
The case concerns Simon Correria, 48, director of a luxury watch brand, who, with his wife, was at the London’s Park Plaza Hotel, Riverbank, for an awards evening.
The Mail on Sunday reports a male waiter carrying drinks was about to back into him so Mr Correria put his hand on his back to warn him.
That waiter, a Muslim man, then claimed he had been abused and a finger penetrated him.
Mr Correria , from Liverpool, protested his innocence and footage from mutiple CCTV cameras in the hotel supported him.
Despite that, the police put a case together and the CPS said he should be charged with sexual assault.
Mr Correria’s life was put on hold for a year with him fearing his business career and the way he was perceived by friends, family and fellow workers, had been changed forever.
The waiter, a Muslim, said his religion meant he was “ very sensitive to this kind of thing”. He has received anonymity because he was an alleged sex victim.
Finally, a year later and it having cost him £10,000 in legal fees, the judge at London Crown Court threw out the case out in one hour 56 minutes.
The judge said the footage wholly contradicted the charges.
Mr Carreras, a father of two, wept when cleared and some of the jury shook his hand and they too cried.
There has never been an apology or explanation from either the police or CPS.
I think the solicitor who okayed this charge should be named and be forced to explain why he or she thought it right that this case be brought.
Was it because the waiter was a Muslim? This whole case stinks.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
The CPS are shocking.

This is an absolute shocker and both the police and CPS should be ashamed this case ever came to court.
The case concerns Simon Correria, 48, director of a luxury watch brand, who, with his wife, was at the London’s Park Plaza Hotel, Riverbank, for an awards evening.
The Mail on Sunday reports a male waiter carrying drinks was about to back into him so Mr Correria put his hand on his back to warn him.
That waiter, a Muslim man, then claimed he had been abused and a finger penetrated him.
Mr Correria , from Liverpool, protested his innocence and footage from mutiple CCTV cameras in the hotel supported him.
Despite that, the police put a case together and the CPS said he should be charged with sexual assault.
Mr Correria’s life was put on hold for a year with him fearing his business career and the way he was perceived by friends, family and fellow workers, had been changed forever.
The waiter, a Muslim, said his religion meant he was “ very sensitive to this kind of thing”. He has received anonymity because he was an alleged sex victim.
Finally, a year later and it having cost him £10,000 in legal fees, the judge at London Crown Court threw out the case out in one hour 56 minutes.
The judge said the footage wholly contradicted the charges.
Mr Carreras, a father of two, wept when cleared and some of the jury shook his hand and they too cried.
There has never been an apology or explanation from either the police or CPS.
I think the solicitor who okayed this charge should be named and be forced to explain why he or she thought it right that this case be brought.
Was it because the waiter was a Muslim? This whole case stinks.
Click to expand...

Dreadful that......

Cnuts everywhere unfortunately, like when Eleanor Williams beat herself up with a hammer and three blokes who were wrongly accused tried to take their own lives. One of them spent 73 days in jail with sex offenders.

Such is the world we live in that such people exist
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back