http://www.legalbanter.co.uk A web gateway with the finest UK legal related newsgroups en Sun, 07 Sep 2008 14:54:50 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/images/002/misc/rss.jpg http://www.legalbanter.co.uk http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47886&goto=newpost Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:47:09 GMT Storm in a provincial tea-cup as British 'bobbies' go extra-judicially
ballistic over alleged 'kiddie porn'

by Roy S. Carson

www.opednews.com

British Police are being forced to review policing procedures
following a unique legal challenge which claims that police officers
should NOT have the authority to act extra-judicially to impose
sanctions on journalists in the proper exercise of their news-
gathering functions in an Olde English rural community.

The challenge, which is presently under review by the Chief Constable
of Lincolnshire (England) has its origins in a claim by a community
administrator in the rural riverside community of Market Deeping (on
the border between Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire) that a local photo-
journalist had "pandered to pedophilia" by taking a photograph during
an award ceremony at the local community center to which the "press"
had been invited.

The photo-journalist (whose name is not being released for personal
security reasons) says "paranoia for pedophilia has run rampant
because of total ignorance of what it's all about! The photograph was
one of a series of twenty taken quite legitimately at the community
event, during which the local Mayor presented a series of 'Thank you'
awards to local volunteers ... but all hell broke loose over a simple
picture of two Brownies (junior Girl Guides = Girl Scouts in USA)
receiving their award from the Community Center president, who is now
the town's Mayor!"

'kiddie porn'? or conventional community reporting?

The photograph was uploaded to a private Facebook page for
distribution for the local media to download and publish in print
editions, but malicious rumors were quickly rampant that the unnamed
girls (wearing Brownie uniforms) were the subject of a pedophile
campaign on the dreaded Internet! The hapless reporter was then
subjected to local censure, his wife suspended as a community
volunteer and a police complaint made against him for demanding that
action should be taken against those responsible.

A storm in a provincial tea-cup one might easily be excused for
thinking, but...

The local British 'Bobby' hunted down the photo-journalist to enforce
an extra-judicial police order, effectively warning him of dire
consequences should be continue to seek redress despite the enormity
of the situation in which he had innocently been placed.

"Quite naturally, I protested the imposition of the extra-judicial
order which I believed to be of malicious intent," the experienced
photo-journalist says. "It was totally ridiculous that I should be
penalized for trying to protect my own reputation! I contacted the
local police commander, Inspector Gary Stewart, and was told that
while the order described as a UBW (Unacceptable Behavior Warning)
'does not order, does not judge and does not apportion guilt' is does
leave me with a 'criminal record' which can be accessed by any future
employer and used against me! It is quite intolerable since under
British Law one is presumed innocent until proven guilty and I have
never had an opportunity to challenge the malicious complaint against
me in a properly convened court of law."

There has recently been a flurry of questionable police actions in
Britain including a complaint against an 80-year-old pensioner for
taking pictures of an empty park swimming pool "because the photograph
could have included children". A freelance photographer was detained
briefly by police on suspicion of pedophilia for taking pictures of a
deserted beach (because if the risk that children could have been
included in the picture).

Britain's ChildNet International advises members of the public on what
to do and what not to do with regards to photographic children but a
press spokesman said that there is a heightened paranoia over child
pornography which is mostly founded in complete ignorance of the
subject and hysterical media reports of genuine cases of child abuse.
The organization reviewed the picture of the two unnamed Brownies and
concluded that it was NOT pornographic and NOT offensive, neither was
it a danger to the little girls since they remain unidentified by
name.

"Children enjoy having their pictures published in newspapers and
nowadays also on the Internet," a ChildNet official said. "Of course
due consideration must be given to protect innocent children from the
attention of pedophiles, for which reason it is general ill-advised to
take photographs of young children in swimming costumes or otherwise
undressed."

The photo-journalist's situation is made worse by the fact that,
following a Freedom of Information Act (2000) request he discovered
that the UBW was also been filed with the local county authorities
with the implication that he could have been sentenced to up to five
years imprisonment and eviction from his home as well as automatic
refusal of re-housing rights...

Local conservative politician, former Stamford Town Mayor, Mr. Terl
Bryant has reviewed the extra-judicial police procedure and says it
came as a complete surprise to him that any police organization could
act in a manner prejudicial to a citizen's right to a court hearing if
charges are brought. The police, on the other hand, say that the
extra-judicial warning is "a recognized method employed by
Lincolnshire police and is fully supported by the (local) South
Kesteven Crime & Reduction Partnership." County official, retired
police officer, Mr. Sandy Kavanagh, however, denies having any part in
the police procedure despite the Lincolnshire police's claim.

British Member of Parliament, Mr. John Hayes (MP for South Holland and
The Deepings), has taken a legislative interest in the case which has
now been forwarded to Lincolnshire County South Division Commander,
Chief Superintendent Carl Langley by Lincolnshire Chief Constable
Richard Crompton in response to the MP's enquiries.

The photojournalist, in his own defense, says"The extra-judicial
action does NOT afford me any opportunity to challenge my accusers in
a court of law, and is therefore an anathema to any sense of what is
generally known as British Justice!"

Roy S. Carson is editor & publisher of VHeadline Venezuela reporting
on news & views from and about Venezuela in South America.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Sto...80904-106.html

*****
WM
www.critest.com
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Webmanager_CritEst http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47886 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47885&goto=newpost Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:35:56 GMT These people are sending an official looking form appearing to come from the EU tax commissioner, offering a refund of some overcharged tax. It is being sent to foreign domiciled people who have paid tax in Europe on non-EU income, so they must have got their addresses from somewhere - perhaps the same person who sold that well known CD to HMRC? To support the reclaim, it asks for a lot of... These people are sending an official looking form appearing to come
from the EU tax commissioner, offering a refund of some overcharged
tax.

It is being sent to foreign domiciled people who have paid tax in
Europe on non-EU income, so they must have got their addresses from
somewhere - perhaps the same person who sold that well known CD to
HMRC?

To support the reclaim, it asks for a lot of detail including (this is
a giveaway) the 3 digit security code for the credit card. Plus a
notarised copy of some documents.

The other giveaway is that the domain (for which they show only an
email address; no website) does not carry a website.

However, I am sure a lot of people will fall for it because it looks
pretty good otherwise.
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47885 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47883&goto=newpost Sun, 07 Sep 2008 06:00:17 GMT wrote: >On Sep 6, 3:19 pm, allan tracy wrote: >> Blair seen as one to revive Labour. >> >> The poll found that Mr Blair would almost halve the Conservative >> party's poll lead from 19 to 10 points, a disappointment to those >> Labour MPs who thought the former prime minister was a liability. >>]]> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 07:21:17 -0700 (PDT), Maria >
wrote:

>On Sep 6, 3:19 pm, allan tracy > wrote:
>> Blair seen as one to revive Labour.
>>
>> The poll found that Mr Blair would almost halve the Conservative
>> party's poll lead from 19 to 10 points, a disappointment to those
>> Labour MPs who thought the former prime minister was a liability.
>>
>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9c8b68ae-7...077b07658.html
>>
>> Why oh why did you do it Gordon and why oh why did you idiots on the
>> left let him do it?
>>
>> The country wants its Prime Minister back; you had no right to take
>> him from us in the first place so now you must surely pay the price.
>>
>> You just couldn't leave it alone could you? You thought maybe we could
>> get some socialism in through the back door (let's face it the front
>> door is shut for good).
>>
>> You thought Brown would be your best wet dream and maybe he could be,
>> but the trouble is we didn't want him twelve years ago and we
>> certainly don't want him now.
>>
>> Give us what we want or f**k off – the choice is yours.
>
>Why do these morons what The Bliar back? Are their memories that short
>that they cannot remember why he went in the first place?

When I was working in Germany in the 1970s several older people
remarked in my hearing that Hitler was a good thing and if he were
around then, all the problems with Baader-Meinhof would be sorted. I
expect there are still some in Germany (and elsewhere) who think along
the same lines.

MM
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) MM http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47883 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47881&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 22:41:11 GMT To give as a Christmas present to the mighty homosexual midget Mr Noel
O'Gara, can anyone suggest where an original might be found
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) frediesmith@googlemail.com http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47881 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47880&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 22:07:25 GMT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8789NMWZ9EI I wish I could have one day where I could turn on the radio or read a paper where Islam is not mentioned or talked about. -- Count Baldoni]]> Pellucid formulated the question :
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8789NMWZ9EI

I wish I could have one day where I could turn on the radio or read a
paper where Islam is not mentioned or talked about.

--
Count Baldoni


]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47880 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47868&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:59:37 GMT In mid July I published extracts of witness statements from the case of Daniel James: http://parellic.blogspot.com/2008/07/corporal-daniel-james-faces-engineered.html who faces a trial on October 2nd under the Official Secrets Act. These extracts were published in the USA and have now been copied on various websites worldwide. Have I committed a crime? It seems that the Prosecution in this... In mid July I published extracts of witness statements from the case of Daniel James:

http://parellic.blogspot.com/2008/07...ngineered.html

who faces a trial on October 2nd under the Official Secrets Act. These extracts were published in the USA and have now been copied on various websites worldwide.

Have I committed a crime? It seems that the Prosecution in this case were intent on suppressing these statements, as they appear to support Daniel's argument that he was doing a good job for the UK in Afghanistan. Now I have been threatened that I am in contempt of Court under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act, that I could be guilty of criminal offences for telling the truth.

I have no time for UK lawyers, who want to twist the truth to suit their own perverted legal lies, and I am sure that Daniel James is being set up for an unfair trial where he will be found guilty using the usual CPS trickery. He should be facing a Court Martial, as any acting soldier has the right to demand. It is only through deceit that he has been forced to accept a Crown Court trial through the intervention of the Attorney General, who would not allow him to elect for a Court Martial.

I am not quaking with fear that liars and cheats will come after me to prosecute me for telling the truth. I can already prove that the Prosecution and their key witness liar were responsible for perverting the course of justice at my own trial in 1993. What I care about is that British Justice is being perverted by career lawyers, who have no interest but to promote their own interests, ]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Michael John Smith http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47868 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47877&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:35:15 GMT ....I'm surprised that no one has been following this case:
http://www.heretical.com/asylum.html

--



]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Spam Hater http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47877 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47876&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:27:25 GMT Data on 5,000 prison staff lost http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7602402.stm A portable hard drive holding details of up to 5,000 prison staff has been lost, the government has confirmed. The names, dates of birth, national insurance numbers and prison service numbers were lost by a private firm EDS as long ago as July 2007.
Data on 5,000 prison staff lost

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7602402.stm

A portable hard drive holding details of up to 5,000 prison staff has been
lost, the government has confirmed. The names, dates of birth, national
insurance numbers and prison service numbers were lost by a private firm EDS
as long ago as July 2007.

However, staff only realised the data was missing in July of this year.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw confirmed he has ordered an inquiry into the
loss and was trying to establish why he was not told of it by the Prison
Service.

The loss of the data by private computing firm EDS was reported to the
Prison Service in July, but Mr Straw was not informed of the problem until
now, after a letter about the missing drive was passed to the News of the
World newspaper.

===========

Surely another nail in the coffin of the national ID card/register


]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Steve Walker http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47876 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47867&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:10:39 GMT FROM: http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/sharpe.html .....the danger of relying on animal experiments is most vividly illustrated by the growing list of animal-tested drugs which are withdrawn or restricted because of unexpected, often fatal, side-effects in people. Examples include Eraldin, Opren, chloramphenicol, clioquinol, Flosint, Ibufenac and Zelmid (Sharpe 1988). Apart from drug withdrawal... FROM: http://vivisection-absurd.org.uk/sharpe.html

.....the danger of relying on animal experiments is most vividly illustrated by the growing list of animal-tested drugs which are withdrawn or restricted because of unexpected, often fatal, side-effects in people. Examples include Eraldin, Opren, chloramphenicol, clioquinol, Flosint, Ibufenac and Zelmid (Sharpe 1988). Apart from drug withdrawal or restriction, unexpected reactions may lead to warnings from the Committee on Safety of Medicines or the medical press (Sharpe 1988). In the case ICI's heart drug, Eraldin, there were serious eye problems, including blindness, and there were 23 deaths.
Ultimately ICI compensated more than 1000 victims (Office of Health Economics 1980). Yet animal experiments had given no warning of the dangers (Inman 1977) and even after the drug was withdrawn in 1976 the harmful effects could not be reproduced in laboratory animals (Weatherall 1982). The antibiotic chloramphenicol, passed safe after animal experiments, was later discovered to cause aplastic anemia, which often proved fatal (Venning 1983).
The British Medical Journal (1952) reports how the drug was thoroughly tested on animals, producing nothing worse than transient anemia in dogs given the drug for long periods by injection, and nothing at all when given orally. Scientists have recently suggested the use of human bone-marrow cells as a more reliable means of detecting such toxic effects prior to clinical trials (Gyte and Williams 1985).
In 1982 the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, Opren, was withdrawn in Britain after 3500 reports of side-effects including 61 deaths mainly through liver damage (British Medical Journal, 1982). Prolonged tests in rhesus monkeys, in which the animals received up to seven times the maximum tolerated human dose for a year, revealed no evidence of toxicity (Dista Products Ltd 1980). Furthermore, animal tests cited in the company's literature make no mention of the photosensitive skins reactions which proved such a problem for patients (Dista Products Ltd 1980).
During the 1960's at least 3500 young asthmatics died in Britain following the use of isoprenaline aerosol inhalers (Inman 1980). Isoprenaline is a powerful asthma drug and deaths were reported in countries using a particularly concentrated form of aerosol which delivered 0,4mg of drug per spray (Stolley 1972). Animal tests had shown that a large doses increased the heart rate but not sufficiently to kill the animals. In fact cats could tolerate 175 times the dose found dangerous to asthmatics (Collins, et al., 1969).
Even after the event it proved difficult to reproduce the drug's harmful effects in animals (Carson, et al., 1971). Japan suffered a major epidemic of drug-induced disease in the case of clioquinol, the main ingredient of Ciba Geigy's antidiarrhoea drugs, Enterovioform and Maxaform (Lancet, 1977a). At least 10,000 people were victims of a new disease called SMON (subacute myelo-optic neuropathy), yet animal experiments carried out by the company revealed 'no evidence that clioquinol is neurotoxic' (Hess, et al., 1972).
Reliance in animal tests can therefore be dangerously misleading. In fact, what protection there is comes mainly from clinical trials where 95% of the drug passed safe and effective on the basis of animal tests are rejected (Medical World News, 1965). Nevertheless the problem appears less serious than it is, because side-effects are grossly under-reported (Lesser 1980): only about a dozen of the 3500 deaths linked with isoprenaline aerosol were reported by doctors at the time, while 11% of fatal reactions associated with anti-inflammatory drugs, phenylbutazone and oxyphenbutazone, were reported as such (Inman 1980).
Most adverse reactions which can occur in patients cannot be demonstrated, anticipated or avoided by the routine subacute and chronic toxicity experiment (Zbinden 1966). This is partly because animals do not have the potential to predict some of the most common or life-threatening effects (Welch 1967). For instance animals cannot tell us if they are suffering from nausea, dizziness, amnesia, headache, depression or other psychological disturbances. Allergic reactions, skin lesions, some blood disorders and many central nervous system effects are some of the more serious problems which once again cannot generally be demonstrated in animals. But even when such effects are excluded, toxicity tests can still prove misleading.
In 1962, the side-effects of six different drugs, reported during clinical practice, were compared with those originally seen in toxicity tests with rats and dogs (Litchfield 1962). The comparisons were restricted to those tests which animals have the potential to predict. Even so, of the 78 adverse reactions seen in patients, the majority (42) were not predicted in animal tests. In most cases, then, predictions based on animal experiments proved incorrect.
Another comparison this time based on 45 drugs, revealed that at best only one out of every four side-effects predicted by animal experiments actually occurred in patients (Fletcher 1978). Even then it is not possible to tell which predictions are accurate until human trials are commenced. Furthermore the report confirmed that many common side-effects cannot be predicted by animal tests at all: examples include nausea, headache, sweating, cramps, dry mouth, dizziness, and in some cases skin lesions and reduced blood pressure. But this study has an additional implication.
With most of the adverse reactions predicted by animal experiments not occurring in people, there is also the danger of unnecessarily rejecting potentially valuable medicines. A classic example is penicillin which, as Florey (1953) admitted, would in all probability have been discarded had it been tested on guinea-pigs, to whom it is highly toxic (Koppanyi and Avery 1966). But the good fortune did not end there. In order to save a seriously ill patient, Fleming wanted to inject penicillin into the spine but the possible results were unknown. Florey tried the experiment with a cat but there wasn't time to wait for the results if Fleming's patient was to have a chance. Fleming's patient received his injection and improved, but Florey's cat died (BBC 1981)!
Another case is digitalis. Although discovered without animal experiments, its more widespread use was delayed because tests on animals incorrectly predicted a dangerous rise in blood pressure (Beddow Bayly 1962). One of the most common animals used in toxicity tests is the rat, yet comparisons with humans reveal major differences in skin characteristics, respiratory parameters, the location of gut flora, B-glucurondase activity, plasma protein binding, biliary excretion, metabolism, allergic hypersensitivity and teratogenicity (Calabrese 1984).
Differences in respiratory parameters are particularly important in inhalation studies, where rats are used extensively. As 'high-risk' animal models used for respiratory and cardiovascular problems, rats are considered inappropriate for asthma, bronchitis and arteriosclerosis, but the species of choice for hypertension (Calabrese 1984). In fact the species most routinely used for toxicological studies are chosen not on consideration of their phylogenetic relationship to humans but on practical grounds of cost, breeding rate, litter size, ease of handling, resistance to intercurrent infections and laboratory tradition (Davies 1977).
One of the most important factors resulting in differences between the species is the speed and pattern of metabolism. Indeed reports show that variations in drug biotransformation are the rule rather than the exception (Levine 1978, Smith and Caldwell 1977, Zbinden 1963). Toxic drug effects which are not predicted by animal test may be seen in people when their metabolism is slower, resulting in longer exposure. But differences in the rate of biotransformation are only one aspect of the metabolic comparison. Of even greater importance is the route of metabolism.
Species variability here can result in poisonous effects which it would be impossible to predict by animal tests. A comparative study of 23 chemicals showed that in only four cases did rats and humans metabolise drugs in the same way (Smith and Caldwell 1977). One example is amphetamone, which is metabolised by the same route in humans, dogs and mice (although faster in the mouse) but by a different pathway in the rat and by still another route in the guinea-pig (Levine 1978).
These difficulties once again stress the need to assess new drugs in volunteers as early as possible. Bernard Brodie of Bethesda' National Heart Institute has stated (Brodie 1962): 'These problems highlight the importance for drug development of testing a drug in man as soon as possible to see whether its rate of metabolism makes it clinically practical. The practice of studying the physiological disposition of a drug in man may only after it is clearly the drug of choice in animals not only may prove shortsighted and time consuming, but also may result in relegating the best drug for man to the shelf for evermore'.


Comment from EcoTort:
Using animals for testing is thus extremely unreliable, and prescribing dangerous drugs on such a false basis is therefore "reasonably forseeable as likely to cause injury" done knowingly, this is reckless and CRIMINAL.
Anti Vivisection Activists are therefore "protecting life, and upholding the law".
The police vow of office is "to protect life and property, and to uphold the law".

Why are Anti Vivisection Activists being arrested for upholding the Police Vow of Office?

discuss?? (+: ]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) EcoTort http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47867 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47875&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 20:50:57 GMT To explain. A paedophobe is one who rants endlessly about paedophiles
yes, but also foreigners taking our jobs, yobs, gays. the liberal
elite, the goody goody nanny state and the fact that teachers can't
torture children anymore.

The padophobe usually has a short willie, a beer gut, a body odour, he
hates himself, he is jealous and known for his whinging, whining,
complaining and his farting.

Please use this term more often when using this newsgroup. There is
however a shortened version of this word and it is: "Sun reader".

The pasedophobe could be also could be a Daily Express or Daily Mail
reader, but in such instances he will normally not disclose his
farting but instead walks up quiet side streets, checks no one is
around and then releases. Thank you.

Turk182
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Turk182 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47875 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47874&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 20:25:26 GMT I've often travelled on the No 3 bus from Crystal Palace but I usually
gets off at Brixton. I'm not sure where it goes from there, but last
week I left my hat on it. A chap said to me "have you checked with
the bus inspector who sometimes stands outside the Oval tube
station?". Well I said, "I didn't realise it went via that route",
"Ooo yes" he said. So I would be most grateful if you could tell me,
one way or the other, if it does, and also whether ot not you've seen
my hat. It were grey. It were an Austin Reed. We purchaed in on the
ground floor in their Lower Regent Street branch in 1991 at about 4:15
of a Thursday. Thank you so much for you kind help. I hope you don't
mind me asking?

Frank Miggins
]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) Turk182 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47874 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47873&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 19:27:52 GMT wrote in message news:dacfba41-af76-47d5-91f1-b7ed14e1e409@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On 6 Sep, 03:22, "Pellucid" wrote: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8789NMWZ9EI > > ================================ > > It's difficult to get my attention for a video, but I sat through that > one. Thank you.]]>
"Ishtar" > wrote in message
...
> On 6 Sep, 03:22, "Pellucid" > wrote:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8789NMWZ9EI
>
> ================================
>
> It's difficult to get my attention for a video, but I sat through that
> one. Thank you.
>
> I noted in particular the words from Leon Uris:
> "Me against my brother;
> my brother and me against my father;
> my family against the clan;
> the clan against the tribe;
> the tribe against the world;
> all of us against the infidels."
>
> AS ALWAYS THE MOTHER-INFANT RELATIONSHIP IS THE UNIVERSAL BLIND SPOT.
>
> Leon Uris should have begin that poem with the line:
>
> "My mother against me......"
>
> Because that's where all this madness began.
>
> The mother-infant relationship is the original Civil War.
>
> The mother-infant relationship put us all on "The Road To Ballyseedy
> Cross," as I stated in my first clumsy essay on this subject back in
> 2003.
>
> As our civilisation continues to decay, everything that you are going
> to see happening around you will continue to be a disguised repeat
> performance of the forgotten horrors of the mother-infant relationship
> in its present degraded, survivalist-mode form.
>
> As long as we don't remember our infancy, our madness is self-
> perpetuating.
>
> The only genuine healing begins with recovering the lost memories of
> the emotional states of infancy.
>
> Face it or be damned.
>
> I you want to heal our tragic civilisation, and heal yourself, start
> reading here:
>
> "Your Baby is not a Sack of Potatoes, Mother"
> http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dddp6bt4_121hsrds9ww
>
>
Boy what a mother hating loony!
and Freud thought the Oedipal complex where a boy hates his father
for possessing his mother was normal?

What Islam like any Orthodox religions teaches is
We're OK you're Not OK, i.e. Alienation.

Steve Terry









]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47873 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47872&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 19:22:14 GMT I am in the process of filling out a HMCS online claim form. I am claiming for faulty goods against a national limited company and am not sure whether I should direct my claim at the store where I bought the suite or their head office. Any advice would be appreciated I am in the process of filling out a HMCS online claim form. I am claiming
for faulty goods against a national limited company and am not sure whether
I should direct my claim at the store where I bought the suite or their head
office. Any advice would be appreciated

]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47872 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47866&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 18:45:25 GMT I would welcome any advice that could help my father. He lives in a cottage that is accessed by a private single track driveway. Alongside the driveway are three fields, two of which are rented to people who use them for grazing horses. The field leases allow use of the driveway for access to the fields. These fields have recently been sub-divided so more horses are being grazed there and more... I would welcome any advice that could help my father. He lives in a cottage that is accessed by a private single track driveway. Alongside the driveway are three fields, two of which are rented to people who use them for grazing horses. The field leases allow use of the driveway for access to the fields. These fields have recently been sub-divided so more horses are being grazed there and more people are requiring access. Tenants of the fields insist on parking their cars - and sometimes trucks - in the driveway, blocking it. When asked to move their vehicles, they claim ignorance that their equipment is causing an obstruction, or say, they won't be there for long. They refuse to park in the fields because they are muddy. This causes delays to our family and risks damaging our vehicles in attempting to get around these unauthorised vehicles. Have I any legal basis for clamping or removing these obstructions? ]]> uk.legal.moderated (Legal Topics Relevant To UK Law - Moderated) davidw http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47866 http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47870&goto=newpost Sat, 06 Sep 2008 17:09:18 GMT Does anybody know the age a child has to be to be able to choose which parent they live with if the parents split up? If there is such a way of doing things, that is. Does anybody know the age a child has to be to be able to choose which
parent they live with if the parents split up? If there is such a way of
doing things, that is.

]]> uk.legal (Legal Issues in the UK) http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=47870