buctootim

I hope Bearsy is alright. He's generally offensive and funny and occasionally a knob, not sympathetic like this. #prayforbearsy

Nine clubs in the past five years. Must add 'something' to the dressing room.

Ive never liked putting money into Murdoch's pocket but didn't want to deprive the kids of the programmes they like. This thread prompted me to look at the options again and I discovered I can get the same programmes plus Netflix from BT for £10pm less. Happy with that.

Good for you, thats the proper way to do it. The problem is that the genuine desire to give to good causes and support family & friends efforts is often being perverted by commercial companies turning a profit on freebie trips marketed to the less scrupulous or careful. Donors need to be very vigilant about how much of the money donated will actually go to the charity concerned and how much will be used to cover the costs of the trip. One of Charity Challenges trips is to go up Mount Etna by cable car and walk around the tourist path at the base. I did that on holiday a couple of years ago and had no idea anyone could possibly market that as a 'challenge' let alone con old ladies into paying for it from their pension. The charity I work for and many others are concerned that donors are being exploited because they are, understandably, must less vigilant about where their money is going when its marketed as 'for charity' than when its a purchase in a shop. Charities need to be beyond reproach and taking money from such enterprises isnt ethical or sensible in the long run. The danger is that people become disillusioned and sceptical of charitable organisations and see them as no more more trustworthy or reputable than the many commercial scams out there. Deal with charities directly, not through commercial companies who are effectively selling holidays through the halo effect of doing good.

Ooh look, a post by Pap about Pap

Really? you'll be taking the self funding option will you? or will almost two thirds (£945 of the minimum £1,550 sponsorship) given for charity be syphoned off to pay for your ferry, hotel, eurostar seat and organiser's profit? Instead why don't you cycle the same distance around England, staying at your friends / grans / colleagues overnight and donate the whole amount sponsored to the charity? Not so appealing?

Thats just a website where you select the holiday you prefer and then get someone else to pay for it. Sorry. I quite fancy a week dogsledding in Sweden - anyone want to sponsor me? https://www.charitychallenge.com/expedition/1879/Dog-Sledding-Challenge

Me too. Its hard to decide which one he is.

This is good too, bit more complicated though. http://www.mustardshopnorwich.co.uk/quick-cassoulet-pgid61.html

Exactly. Torturing people blows out the water any claim to be the good guys and the legitimate government and that your opponents are evil and should be shunned.

You're right, the total cost then was much less, given the much greater public subsidy of private profits now. Northern rail paid dividends of £38million despite losing 50p for every mile travelled by every passenger. From the Institute of Economic Affairs - a right wing conservative think tank. "Taxpayer subsidies to the rail sector have reached astronomical levels. At £6 billion per year (including Crossrail), they have roughly trebled in real terms over the last twenty years". https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rail-subsidy-per-passenger-mile http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/16/rail-operators-200m-dividends-subsidy http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/why-are-rail-subsidies-so-high

Does that include the line rental?

Yep Norwegian. It was mostly very good but with occasional dead patches. Either fast or nothing - I guess to do with angle of sight to the satellite.

Am on the way to Salzburg and discovered by accident the plane offers free WIFI. Is this new or have I been living in some kind of backward bubble and everyone else knows about it? Maybe it's only been possible since the in flight restrictions on tech devices were relaxed. The wife is welcome but I hope mobile phone signal doesn't follow

Make your own pesto from scratch. Its easy and is so much better than the pre-prepared stuff.

Mario

Bu why would he refuse? thats the whole point of the report. Torture doesn't work - it didn't give any additional information over and above conventional techniques and it impeded other intelligence gathering because potential informants no longer wanted to collaborate with such a brutal regime. Yes of course you can imagine a hypothetical situation where torturing 1 person would save thousands of lives, but in reality it doesn't happen.

Lets turn it around. Which is more effective - a plea bargain by which he gives up the location and accomplices in exchange for a light sentence and new identity. Or tortured to reveal location and facing retribution from accomplices and 30 years in prison?

Do I believe the the chair of the Intelligence committee and her team who spent 5 years looking into this and the public statement of the President, or a random saintswebber who believes in no rights for anybody except in his to have more money. Tricky.

Remind me. How do we know that they know where our family is given they aren't talking ? Is it because we tortured them until they said so or because we've guessed they might know and we dont have any other leads / plans for that evening.

So the Chair of the Senate Intelligence committee was lying then? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30401025 What did the Senate committee find out? 1) The CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining co-operation from detainees. 2)The CIA's justification for the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques rested on inaccurate claims of their effectiveness. 3) The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others. 180 hours 4) The conditions of confinement for CIA detainees were harsher than the CIA had represented to policymakers and others. 5) The CIA repeatedly provided inaccurate information to the Department of Justice, impeding a proper legal analysis of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. 6) The CIA has actively avoided or impeded congressional oversight of the programme. 7) The CIA impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making. The CIA's operation and management of the programme complicated, and in some cases impeded, the national security missions of other executive branch agencies. 9) The CIA impeded oversight by the CIA's Office of Inspector General. 10) The CIA co-ordinated the release of classified information to the media, including inaccurate information concerning the effectiveness of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques. 11) The CIA was unprepared as it began operating its Detention and Interrogation Program more than six months after being granted detention authorities. 12) The CIA's management and operation of its Detention and Interrogation Program was deeply flawed throughout the programme's duration, particularly so in 2002 and early 2003. 13) Two contract psychologists devised the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and played a central role in the operation, assessments, and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. By 2005, the CIA had overwhelmingly outsourced operations related to the programme. George W Bush qupte 14) CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorised by CIA headquarters. 15) The CIA did not conduct a comprehensive or accurate accounting of the number of individuals it detained, and held individuals who did not meet the legal standard for detention. The CIA's claims about the number of detainees held and subjected to its enhanced interrogation techniques were inaccurate. 16) The CIA failed to adequately evaluate the effectiveness of its enhanced interrogation techniques. 17) The CIA rarely reprimanded or held personnel accountable for serious and significant violations, inappropriate activities, and systemic and individual management failures. 18) The CIA marginalised and ignored numerous internal critiques, criticisms, and objections concerning the operation and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. 19) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was inherently unsustainable and had effectively ended by 2006 due to unauthorised press disclosures, reduced cooperation from other nations, and legal and oversight concerns. 20) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program damaged the United States' standing in the world, and resulted in other significant monetary and non-monetary costs.

What members of the US Congress? Those lefty hippies who just want people to have namby pampby rights and stuff.

Did you miss the fact that the torture didn't yield any additional useful information but did lead to reduced co-operation between allies?

Are the Gov dyslexic?