badgerx16

Like David Cameron, you are in a minority of 1, methinks.

2-1 Saints, Skates down to 10 men.

I liked Dennis Skinner's comment on Camoron's statement: "As Dell Boy would say: 'What a plonker'."

The King's German Legion were Hanoverians loyal to the German Georges; there were also German allies from Nassau & Brunswick; the Dutch/Belgians were the troops of the Prince of Orange, and many were veterans of Napoleon's army, still wearing his uniforms. The latter quote is generally thought to be a fabrication, derived from derogatory comments made about some reinforcements sent to him during the Peninsular War, though it was inserted into the dialogue of the film "Waterloo" as a description of the Iniskillens.

FC, you must try harder next time

And the only reason Wellington fought at Waterloo was the promise of German ( Prussian ) reinforcements, and less than half of his army were British ( the rest being a mix of German, Dutch, and Belgian ).

https://www.uktradeinfo.com/index.cfm?task=noneufullreport&hasFlashPlayer=true UK’s Non EU exports have increased by £1.3 billion (11.6 per cent) compared to September 2011, to £12.7 billion. Compared to October 2010, exports have increased by £2.1 billion (19.9 per cent). UK’s Non EU imports have increased by £0.8 billion (4.7 per cent) compared to September 2011, to £17.9 billion. Compared to October 2010 imports have increased by £1.9 billion (11.9 per cent). That seems to be a monthly deficit of £5.2 Bn. So based on monthly figures slightly over half of our exports go into the EU.

Even Dune's pin-up boy isn't happy ! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16111356 The UKIP leader said David Cameron "had gained nothing" dealing with European leaders in Brussels after he vetoed an EU-wide treaty change. Nigel Farage said British financial markets were left vulnerable and it could lead to more EU regulation of the City of London, with Britain now in the "worst of all worlds".

From the Mail on Sunday : The Lib Dem peer Lord Greaves said: ‘David Cameron is a petulant fool who went to Brussels and shouted his mouth off. Lib Dem Euro MP Edward McMillan-Scott, who defected from the Tories, branded Mr Cameron ‘an unprincipled spiv’ Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2072637/Humiliation-Nick-Clegg-Cameron-didnt-phone-Lib-Dem-leader-warn-historic-veto.html#ixzz1gBTgtNe1

Labour and the Liberal Democrats warned Britain was now dangerously isolated. There was growing evidence that Cameron has left Britain powerless to resist new European tax raids on the City. While he opted out of a *Europe-wide *transactions tax, British firms who operate abroad will be subject to it in the European countries where they trade. But unlike those countries, the Government will have no say in setting the tax rate or how it is administered. Business Secretary Vince *Cable has told Nick Clegg he should never have agreed to Cameron rejecting the EU deal. Mr Cable said: *“Fin*ancial service regulation was not nearly a big enough issue to use the veto.” More details emerged last night of the panic that led to Mr Cameron’s decision. As well as facing a Tory backbench rebellion, the PM was warned that Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith and Northern Ireland Secretary Owen Paterson were close to quitting, the Sunday Mirror has learned. ...............................Lib Dem peer Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay says: “Cameron has cut Britain off from her main trading partners. It is deeply dangerous. Millions of jobs all over Britain, not just a few thousand in the City, have been put at risk.” Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/news/2011/12/11/david-cameron-overplayed-his-hand-on-europe-says-source-as-coalition-comes-under-huge-strain-115875-23626059/#ixzz1gBSvYI4I

No the country is not behind him, it's just the way the majority of the press, being right wing europhobes, are bound to report it. The only way to determine how the country feel is to hold a .....now what's the word.........hang on I'll get it in a moment.......that's it, a referendum !

Surely this is down to Nigel Adkins and the GK coaching staff ? They have worked with Bart and know his abilities, so should we not trust that they know what they are doing ?

Bart should stay. Kelv has moments where his critics come out like flies round sh1t, and to be honest who will we get who is better than Bart & yet is willing to sit on the bench for 95% of the season, without even reserves games to look forward to ? Unless we are going to look for a new #1, and demote KD to backup we shouild stick with what we have.

Better this week than next !

And the board is infested by jerks who are getting at NA and the squad. Exactly 12 months ago Blackpool were 36 places above us.

Go on then, give an example. If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Don't we still have Forecast ?

No, he cost us a goal, if our finishing was better we would have scored more - so why not blame Guly for 2 dropped points. I'm not specifically trying to protect Bart, but getting on his back won't improve his performances, and he is still our only backup to KD.

1) we've scored more goals 2) S before W in the alphabet Anyway, Reading and Millwall will win.

Maybe he's fine in training but lack of first team appearances has drained his confidence. The problem with being a keeper is that the slightest error is likely to concede a goal, there is very rarely another player covering your mistakes.

As far as I am aware that is b0ll0x - the 'private land' rules apply only for an individual's house or property, the ICO says "The Data Protection Act does not apply to individuals’ private or household purposes. So if you install a camera on your own home to protect it from burglary, the Act will not apply", although there is guidance on whether you can use it to monitor public spaces - so you can monitor a private driveway but should try to avoid the footpath outside your curtelage. IMO the college car park is a public space by definition, and the College is a business premises, so the DPA applies. Also, not sure of the relevance or accuracy, but I found this elsewhere : " If this is a private car park then neither careless driving or reporting a road accident apply so it is not a police matter. If the car park is public then careless driving laws apply and any accident needs to be reported (or details exchanged/owner informed etc) As per RTA 1988 section 3 and section 170, both as amended by RTA 1991."

A partly disgraced cabinet member, who only kept his seat as he's from the minority partner, hoping to get back in his boss's good books. Every member of the coalition front bench will say it's a good thing, because the alternative is for the facade of co-operation to crumble.

Come to think of it, were there clear signs up concerning the use of CCTV on the car park ? If not, the images can't be used.

As you will be on the alleged images, you can make a Data Subject Access request under the DP Act. This is an extract from the Code of Practice : " [h=3]9.2 Subject access requests[/h] Individuals whose images are recorded have a right to view the images of themselves and, unless they agree otherwise, to be provided with a copy of the images. This must be provided within 40 calendar days of receiving a request. You may charge a fee of up to £10 (this is the current statutory maximum set by Parliament). Those who request access must provide you with details which allow you to identify them as the subject of the images and also to locate the images on your system. You should consider: How will the staff involved in operating the CCTV system recognise a subject access request? Do you have internal procedures in place for handling subject access requests? This could include keeping a log of the requests received and how they were dealt with, in case you are challenged. A clearly documented process will also help guide individuals through such requests. This should make it clear what an individual needs to supply. You should decide: What details will you need to find the images? Is it made clear whether an individual will need to supply a photograph of themselves or a description of what they were wearing at the time they believe they were caught on the system, to aid identification? Is it made clear whether details of the date, time and location are required? What fee will you charge for supplying the requested images (up to a maximum of £10) and how should it be paid? Make this clear to people making access requests. How will you provide an individual with copies of the images? If images of third parties are also shown with the images of the person who has made the access request, you must consider whether you need to obscure the images of third parties. If providing these images would involve an unfair intrusion into the privacy of the third party, or cause unwarranted harm or distress, then they should be obscured. In many cases, images can be disclosed as there will not be such intrusion. Example: A public space CCTV camera records people walking down the street and going about their ordinary business. Where nothing untoward has occurred, this can be released without editing out third party images. Example: Images show the individual who has made the request with a group of friends, waving at a camera in the town centre. There is little expectation of privacy and the person making the request already knows their friends were there. It is likely to be fair to release the image to the requester without editing out the faces of their friends. Example: Images show a waiting room in a doctor’s surgery. Individuals have a high expectation of privacy and confidentiality. Images of third parties should be redacted (blurred or removed) before release. Where you decide that third parties should not be identifiable, then you will need to make arrangements to disguise or blur the images in question. It may be necessary to contract this work out to another organisation. Where this occurs, you will need to have a written contract with the processor which specifies exactly how the information is to be used and provides you with explicit security guarantees."

Well, we have a ( mostly ) German Royal Family, so I suppose that makes them relatives, whereas the Frogs are just garlic munching surrender monkeys. Plus we've fought more wars with the Germans against the French than vice versa.

Well we already have PoundLand !