saintbletch

You're better than that, Toke. Well you used to be. You know very well that the TS"HFWW"T thread sprang out of the vacuum left when The Bear put down the acoustic and picked up the electric. It was dead on here - as my first line on that thread shows:

Yep, and it's the gift that keeps giving for those that had been wronged by them, papster. All you have to do is coax three innocuous posts out of the returning ban-ee and they're done. I'd like to see everyone, en mass, replying to Barry's first returning posting efforts with "Pardon?". Then once he's repeated himself twice more, he's all squeezed out of hate-gism. You could toy with them; like throwing stones at a vicious dog that is on a leash that keeps him just out of reach, knowing there is nothing it can do about it. The whole process would be educational for the offender and cathartic for the offended. It's TSW Community Service - like having the offender that broke into your house and stole your stash of XXL transvestite clothing be forced to do your gardening once per week (wearing your favourite basque). What's not to like.

You make me sick Toke. You don't come in here for months, then you blow alliterative smoke up St. Chalet's metaphorical arse, and now you're, what, some sort of word-genius all of a sudden? Well all I'll say is that if you are a word-genius, then you get that from my side of the family (as well as the small penis). You get your breasts and dog 'fascination' from your mother.

So, you complete the holiday form, get it approved by The Man, hand over control of the Red Button to Toke, and take the evening off TMS, only for Barry to turn up like some unwanted Halley's Comet on an annual, PayPal-powered elliptical orbit. And no sooner is he here, than he's gone. I missed it, and now I've got to make sure I'm on duty, looking up at the skies every 17th of November from now until the end of time. You have to say that whilst he was only visible to those looking up at the time, he created more stir on here than some of us semi-professional posters ever manage. As someone mentioned, there's a case for restraining returning ban-ees to 3 posts a day until they've proven they can be good boys (or girls - have we ever had a female ban-ee?) again. Some **** would fly, and it'd stir things up, but we wouldn't drown in excrement. Plus, that **** ********* who can't park would be 'on tag' too. Well, The Man has proven himself open to forum suggestions in the past, so I might just pop along to Site Suggestions and make a suggestion about the site.

Bird flu. What's so surprising about that?

Met. Police. Did you?

I'd agree with your general point, but IF mother-Russia was behind this (and to be honest it does appear a little amateurish for a state-led conspiracy - pap to The Lounge please!), then all they need is enough muddying of the waters, so that back home it appears as a credible possibility. As to your point that the Ukrainians would gain nothing from deliberately shooting down the plane. I'm not so sure. Firstly, I should say that I don't believe they did. Secondly, if memory serves the West weighed-in more heavily with sanctions against Russia following the downing of the plane, and Russia's involvement in the conflict has been given greater attention since. So I'd say that Ukraine 'benefited' from the downing of the plane, if you'll forgive the suggestion. What I find amazing is that if, as we believe, Russia had some hand in the flight being shot down - albeit maybe 'only' perhaps supplying the hardware, then I'm surprised this didn't escalate further than it did. Western citizens were killed in the incident, and yet Russia apparently still maintains its stance. It just shows how impotent diplomacy is, when the object of your diplomatic ire doesn't give a ****.

I think the Russian / pro-Russian rebel contention would be that it was deliberately targeted for propaganda purposes.

Sorry to disappoint BTT, but I'm barely educated and common I'm afraid. Who else, but a commoner word grill an oyster? Personally, whilst the similarities of the clitoral hood to the raw oyster aren't lost on me, I'm not sure that that sensation should ever be felt sliding down one's throat. It's like some corrupt conflation of cunnilingus and fellatio - only the bourgeoisie would encourage that.

Oysters Kilpatrick. Do they?

I really didn't think anyone else would be 'brave' enough to join in on the tales Volk, his WAG and the carazy things they encounter in their lives. But now you mention it Owly, I've just had a text from Volk telling me that he and his bird have just bought a car that had previously been eaten by a van. Good to know.

Mine was a looker, and a spiritual leader too.

Hirohito of course - I know you're a fan. Or Bletch. Or Carson. BTW, has the Mrs had any odd cravings yet? You know, eating soil, scratching her ear with her toes, freaking out when the postman "comes", that sort of thing? P.S. I need a new Llama. If you come across a good one, let me know. Must look good in lycra. Rule #1.

David Shukman. Did he?

So I've taken matters into my own hands here, GarrettIvo, and I've called the Perth Child Protection Agency. Anyone that comes to TMS looking for advice on naming their child, is not fit to raise one. No offence, well a little perhaps. Why don't you do that really vain thing of naming the child after yourself, and suffix its name with "Jnr" or "the 2nd". Or, if it's a girl, take a leaf out Nigel Lawson's book and add an "a" to the end of your own name to make a female equivalent. That's what we did for my daughter "Youcompletetwata". You mean, I'm going to be a Grandad? I just hope it doesn't bark. Seriously Toke, congratulations mate! That's great news. Oh, and by the way I've got one or one suggestion for the name - if it's a boy. PM me for details.

Interesting video. I note that Southampton has also become two words. I have an American friend who lives in California who used to refer to our beloved team as South Hampton. I think it stems from their early exposure to The Hamptons, so I don't blame them, but I will judge them. Another couple of mates are Wolves and QPR supporters, and the same guy refers to their teams as the Wolverton Wolverines and the Range Park Queens. So I guess we got off lightly.

Is Toke back from Japan yet?

I'd find it difficult to find fault in what you say here. Thanks for taking the time to articulate it so clearly. You mentioned earlier that you are concerned that UKIP's position is being misrepresented. My concern is that UKIP's position is not yet fixed. It is a young party that has not yet been tested by power. I fear that unlike your position above, other UKIP voters will see the UKIP publicly stated position as a starting point for where they want the party to go in future. I also believe that UKIP's strategists (Farage amongst them), recognise this phenomenon, and will do what they can to court anti-immigration votes in exchange for power. That's a dangerous game. Your position reminds me a little of how I felt when I helped to elect Blair. I thought we'd found our Kennedy. I thought I knew what I was going to get. But I was wrong. I think this might be bad for you too. UKIP may not end up being the party you would like it to be.

Yep, I've certainly never seen you as someone that is rabidly suggesting people should be forced to leave the country, I hope my post didn't suggest that you were, but I'm sure I remember you suggesting that we should instigate tighter immigration controls. I'm simply interested in whether your personal situation and experience has led you to that conclusion, or is this an intellectual conclusion. My position is that I can intellectually understand the argument that we can't just have an open border, that makes a lot of sense. But right now, I have simply not been touched by our current, or past immigration policies to the point where they form part of my political thinking. I just don't consider the origin of the people I meet or deal with in life or business, as anyway important - other than that I might have to observe certain cultural formalities. Again, you've no reason to respond to me interrogating you in this way, but I am genuinely interested. Especially as you've previously shown yourself as someone who is happy to discuss and defend your views on UKIP. I'm not trying to trap you, or show you the error of your logic. And at the end of our discussion I suspect we'll both agree that we've simply arrived at different conclusions from observing the same facts. I am suggesting however that where you might see a subtle and important fag-paper's distinction between UKIP's position and that of the other parties, some UKIP voters will be attracted to the anti-immigration policy halo that the UKIP position might one day foretell.

I agree that we're unlikely to see mass ejections - either way, but I do think there will be impacts. One such impact of us leaving the EU, would probably be related to what happens to the local health care cover for those 1M+ expats in Spain. I don't know if domiciled ex-pats rely on that (e111 card?) that we holiday-making Brits do. But I would imagine that we might see some of those ex-pats over retirement age choosing to return for health reasons. I could also imagine that their status might change over time too, so that instead of being seen as fellow European citizens that contribute economically, they might start to be blamed for the undoubted negative impact that the UK leaving the EU would have. How beautifully ironic would that be? The expat Brit that loves Spain and the Spanish people, being demonised as an outsider and blamed for the fresh economic turmoil that Spain would be experiencing due to the UK's exit from the EU. I could see groups of Spanish youths, well youths at first, but it would surely quickly spread to the oldest Spaniards and then to the majority, each finding it difficult to reconcile the fact that Spain's economy has now gone from bad to worse due to these strangers that live amongst them. Expats Brits, who had spent years integrating themselves into Spanish life and culture, and who had embraced the Spanish people and land, and who had spent their pensions in Spanish shops and paid their Spanish taxes, would slowly find themselves experiencing a different treatment. People who once simply ignored them when their economy was OK, were now starting to blame them for this fresh downturn. Political parties in Spain would start to recognise that if they wanted power, they would need to speak for the average Miguel in the street, and represent his concerns about the 1M outsiders that live amongst them and surely sponge off their already struggling economy. Commentators would rationalise that Spain can only sustain a certain number of people, and that if they had less people living there, they surely would each enjoy a better standard of life. And over time, the average Maria in the street would start to focus her attention away from their own hardships, and by attempting to take control of their otherwise poor life, they would join the movement to blame the Brits. A vision that couldn't happen? Perhaps. Or is this what is happening right here, right now? Personally I just can't relate to this feeling of us being overrun with immigrants. I'm not judging you because your thoughts are different, it's just that the way I live my life, and living where I do, it has zero day-to-day impact on me. I'm sure there must be macroeconomic impacts that affect me, but they are simply too abstract for me to feel on a daily basis. What's more I also assume that because I don't feel this on a daily basis, there must be some sort of problem-reducing net effect when taking the positives and the negatives together. Either way, it just isn't real enough for me on a day-to-day basis to make me passionate or angry enough to campaign to change things. The people I blame for the difficulties we find ourselves in are those that ran the financial institutions badly, and those that let them do this. And even then, I recognise that finance at that level is so complex and 'unreal', that few could really have predicted the impact it would have. And fewer still would have been brave enough to turn off the gravy-tap and legislate to 'force' their financial services sector to relocate to less regulated climes. In short, we are where we are due to immensely complex financial factors caused by a butterfly wing flapping somewhere in New York. It sucks. But that's the cause. I do recognise that if I lived in an area where the immigrant population was particularly large, and that perhaps because if this impacted my ability to find work, or that my family was affected in some way, then I might reach a different conclusion. I'd like to think that I would still try to see individuals impacting me in individual circumstances. I'd like to think that, but it's very easy for me to say that from the outside. So as I say, I won't judge anyone who reaches a different conclusion who has been directly impacted. The concern I have, is that I believe that many who are targeting immigration have not been directly impacted in the way I describe. At the same time, I feel that all of them have been impacted by the stupid politicians and the greedy bankers. I fear that those who are lining up to make their UKIP mark are simply using immigration to rationalise their poor quality of life in these straitened times. It's human nature to want to try to take back control when we've been shafted by stupid politicians and greedy bankers. The feeling of helplessness is not one that human condition can live with for very long without losing the balance of one's mind, or taking positive steps to grab back control and to be helpless no longer. Being told that we have decades of austerity ahead of us isn't an easy pill to swallow. So for many, finding a target for our anger and frustration has meant focussing on outsiders - those that are not like 'us'. They surely must be to blame, and if they're not, taking positive control and focussing our anger and energy on them at least makes us feel better. Can I ask you, and others that feel there is an issue over immigration, whether you are or have been directly impacted by it? I'm really not looking to score points, not looking to judge you, and I'd understand if you're not comfortable sharing your personal situation. But I'm interested to see why you (each) have formed those views. And I'm asking about direct impacts here. Or perhaps you'll be happy enough to admit that you are simply reaching an intellectual conclusion that all or part of the problems we find ourselves with must surely have been caused by immigration?

Mary and Joseph being turned away from a Premier Inn by Lennie Henry.

Mario and Luigi on Rogue Traders.

Two girls, one World Cup.