Dale Farm - now it's Len vs the council

First published in News by

Basildon Council has agreed to meet Dale Farm neighbour Len Gridley after he tried to take legal action at the High Court.

Mr Gridley, 52, today applied for an injunction to force the council to remove soil and rubble bunds around cleared traveller pitches at the former illegal site, saying they were an eyesore, as bad as when the camp was there.

His application was thrown out by the judge, but Mr Gridley hinted it was only the first round of legal action against the authority over alleged maladministration in connection with Dale Farm and the neighbouring legal site.

He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission.

A council spokesman said: "We have agreed to speak to Mr Gridley about his concerns, which is something we would have been happy to do before he took this to court."

Comments (115)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:42pm Mon 7 Nov 11

geezer, innit says...

He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission.



I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.
[quote]He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission. [/quote] I thought that he didn't want to sell his house. geezer, innit
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Mon 7 Nov 11

termite1944 says...

can never please some folk!
can never please some folk! termite1944
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Mon 7 Nov 11

Grandmaster says...

Never thought I would side with Tony Ball.
Never thought I would side with Tony Ball. Grandmaster
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Mon 7 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

It would be some battle if Len gets his tank aiming at, say, 150 plus armed riot police like the council used last month.

At least old Len isn't afraid to stand up to the psycho bureaucrats, not like many of the other anti-traveller screamers who jumped on the nonsensical "greenbelt" bandwagon in a last-ditch effort to try to prop up their own falling property prices, by blaming everybody bar the the real culprits responsible for the economic collapse across the western world.

It must be galling to see property that peaked in price under the heinous Blair now decline even further under Dave Cameron.
At least old Len was able to get his "illegal" bit of development on his dad's place ratified by the council, before he realised what they were like and fell out with them bigtime.

As a potential new neighbour for old Len, I think I'd better wait till the council's armed riot police have tazered or "taken out" his tank, before I move in.
Of course, this is unlikely to happen: first, the council ain't got the money now, and, second, the "chosen developers", for whom this whole fiasco has taken place, will soon offer Len enough "coffee money" to make him quit his yapping.
A nice little earner for the man, plus all the other little extras he probably trousered from those who have pocketed the lion's share of the likely £22 million plus, this whole nonsense will probably cost in total.

And as for the "hardcore and bricks" on the private property, well, I've asked and asked who is the rightful owner, without a satisfactory answer to date.
As predicted, the council really have no option now but to make a big mess of the scrapyard, just like they did before at Hovefields and other places.

They were hoping to sweep all this under the carpet -especially as they might well have been instrumental in putting the stuff there in the first place - but, they've kind of snookered themselves now.

Personally, the only way I can see for the council to salvage even 0.01 % of the money they've wasted is to set up some sort of Pinewood studios at the Barleylands and make their version of Hammer House of Horror productions and Carry on Down the Farm films.
They'd be the stars, of course, and as old Len has never been shy of getting in front of the cameras, we'd likely get the classic carry on squabbles.
And, if they can ever catch that bloke who used to be perving from those woods at the young girls on the Farm, they might even get some kinda "hardcore CD"s to flog round Basildon and make a bit of bunce for Christmas, if they can persuade him -whoever he was - to play ball.
It would be some battle if Len gets his tank aiming at, say, 150 plus armed riot police like the council used last month. At least old Len isn't afraid to stand up to the psycho bureaucrats, not like many of the other anti-traveller screamers who jumped on the nonsensical "greenbelt" bandwagon in a last-ditch effort to try to prop up their own falling property prices, by blaming everybody bar the the real culprits responsible for the economic collapse across the western world. It must be galling to see property that peaked in price under the heinous Blair now decline even further under Dave Cameron. At least old Len was able to get his "illegal" bit of development on his dad's place ratified by the council, before he realised what they were like and fell out with them bigtime. As a potential new neighbour for old Len, I think I'd better wait till the council's armed riot police have tazered or "taken out" his tank, before I move in. Of course, this is unlikely to happen: first, the council ain't got the money now, and, second, the "chosen developers", for whom this whole fiasco has taken place, will soon offer Len enough "coffee money" to make him quit his yapping. A nice little earner for the man, plus all the other little extras he probably trousered from those who have pocketed the lion's share of the likely £22 million plus, this whole nonsense will probably cost in total. And as for the "hardcore and bricks" on the private property, well, I've asked and asked who is the rightful owner, without a satisfactory answer to date. As predicted, the council really have no option now but to make a big mess of the scrapyard, just like they did before at Hovefields and other places. They were hoping to sweep all this under the carpet -especially as they might well have been instrumental in putting the stuff there in the first place - but, they've kind of snookered themselves now. Personally, the only way I can see for the council to salvage even 0.01 % of the money they've wasted is to set up some sort of Pinewood studios at the Barleylands and make their version of Hammer House of Horror productions and Carry on Down the Farm films. They'd be the stars, of course, and as old Len has never been shy of getting in front of the cameras, we'd likely get the classic carry on squabbles. And, if they can ever catch that bloke who used to be perving from those woods at the young girls on the Farm, they might even get some kinda "hardcore CD"s to flog round Basildon and make a bit of bunce for Christmas, if they can persuade him -whoever he was - to play ball. fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

6:07pm Mon 7 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Mr Gridley plays with fire as there are claims, he 'conned' his way onto greenbelt himself. The council will want to draw a line under this as quickly as they can but of course the legal reps have more pepper to blow. I think there is a lot more to be disclosed from the archives of the council and of course this can come out at anytime.
Mr Gridley plays with fire as there are claims, he 'conned' his way onto greenbelt himself. The council will want to draw a line under this as quickly as they can but of course the legal reps have more pepper to blow. I think there is a lot more to be disclosed from the archives of the council and of course this can come out at anytime. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:26pm Mon 7 Nov 11

Brunning999 says...

geezer, innit wrote:
He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission.



I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.
What are you bloody on about that poor guy has suffered beyond all reasonable belief by any reasonable person.

The last Labour Government and Local council at Basildon from any party let him suffer directly for 10 years.

He will win and if the Council had any brain whatsoever they would settle out of court.

To allow anyone to suffer for 10 years is appalling it was without doubt a complete and total failure of the local council to do their obligatory duty for years.

Good luck Len,you were the only person in that area to that would stand up for the Law on behalf of all of us lawful folk.

I hope you get a fortune.
[quote][p][bold]geezer, innit[/bold] wrote: [quote]He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission. [/quote] I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.[/p][/quote]What are you bloody on about that poor guy has suffered beyond all reasonable belief by any reasonable person. The last Labour Government and Local council at Basildon from any party let him suffer directly for 10 years. He will win and if the Council had any brain whatsoever they would settle out of court. To allow anyone to suffer for 10 years is appalling it was without doubt a complete and total failure of the local council to do their obligatory duty for years. Good luck Len,you were the only person in that area to that would stand up for the Law on behalf of all of us lawful folk. I hope you get a fortune. Brunning999
  • Score: 0

10:09am Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Brunning999 wrote:
geezer, innit wrote:
He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission.



I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.
What are you bloody on about that poor guy has suffered beyond all reasonable belief by any reasonable person.

The last Labour Government and Local council at Basildon from any party let him suffer directly for 10 years.

He will win and if the Council had any brain whatsoever they would settle out of court.

To allow anyone to suffer for 10 years is appalling it was without doubt a complete and total failure of the local council to do their obligatory duty for years.

Good luck Len,you were the only person in that area to that would stand up for the Law on behalf of all of us lawful folk.

I hope you get a fortune.
Suffering? Neighbours can be troublesome but "suffering" What would he sue for? suffering? As for standing up for the law, will Mr Gridley now stand up for more serious breeching of the law, ie murder, will he hunt down law breakers lol..please lets keep this logical and realistic, Mr G complained about neighbours, people of the same lifestyle as his ex wife (bitter) and yet there are rumours he was as guilty of breeching the law in regards to greenbelt and also a bad neighbour, arson and threatening with a fire arm..as a neutral i can see both sides and comment on both..sometimes a outsider can see the greenbelt from the caravans
[quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]geezer, innit[/bold] wrote: [quote]He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission. [/quote] I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.[/p][/quote]What are you bloody on about that poor guy has suffered beyond all reasonable belief by any reasonable person. The last Labour Government and Local council at Basildon from any party let him suffer directly for 10 years. He will win and if the Council had any brain whatsoever they would settle out of court. To allow anyone to suffer for 10 years is appalling it was without doubt a complete and total failure of the local council to do their obligatory duty for years. Good luck Len,you were the only person in that area to that would stand up for the Law on behalf of all of us lawful folk. I hope you get a fortune.[/p][/quote]Suffering? Neighbours can be troublesome but "suffering" What would he sue for? suffering? As for standing up for the law, will Mr Gridley now stand up for more serious breeching of the law, ie murder, will he hunt down law breakers lol..please lets keep this logical and realistic, Mr G complained about neighbours, people of the same lifestyle as his ex wife (bitter) and yet there are rumours he was as guilty of breeching the law in regards to greenbelt and also a bad neighbour, arson and threatening with a fire arm..as a neutral i can see both sides and comment on both..sometimes a outsider can see the greenbelt from the caravans NightnDay
  • Score: 0

10:37am Tue 8 Nov 11

EthanEdwards says...

Suffering yes absolutely. Good for you Sir Len.
Suffering yes absolutely. Good for you Sir Len. EthanEdwards
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Tue 8 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony".

Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted.

Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law.

It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime.

What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts. fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

1:57pm Tue 8 Nov 11

OneManOneVoice says...

fearsiuil wrote:
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
People don't tend to burgle their own chalets Captain Genius.
[quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.[/p][/quote]People don't tend to burgle their own chalets Captain Genius. OneManOneVoice
  • Score: 0

4:08pm Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

EthanEdwards wrote:
Suffering yes absolutely. Good for you Sir Len.
oh how the gulible exsit..Sir Len...lol...do they give knighthoods now to hypocrites, people who have had their gun licence taken away from them? lol...please stop i ache.
[quote][p][bold]EthanEdwards[/bold] wrote: Suffering yes absolutely. Good for you Sir Len.[/p][/quote]oh how the gulible exsit..Sir Len...lol...do they give knighthoods now to hypocrites, people who have had their gun licence taken away from them? lol...please stop i ache. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

4:11pm Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon?
People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

5:29pm Tue 8 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

fearsiuil wrote:
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony".

Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted.

Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law.

It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime.

What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.
[quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.[/p][/quote]Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts. jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

5:30pm Tue 8 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

Does anyone know what Len Gridley does for a living?
Does anyone know what Len Gridley does for a living? jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony".

Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted.

Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law.

It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime.

What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.
Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it.
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.[/p][/quote]Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.[/p][/quote]Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony".

Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted.

Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law.

It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime.

What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.
Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it.
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.[/p][/quote]Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.[/p][/quote]Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Tue 8 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony".

Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted.

Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law.

It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime.

What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.
Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.
Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it.
OK I will, after you've posted up the evidence that shows that Dale Farm has less crime than other parts.....I wont hold my breath lol
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Just a few weeks ago, we were reading about "Sir Len" and "Sir Tony". Now that the council are about bust, I don't think there's enough loot for both of them to be knighted. Anybody know what Lord Hanningfield has to say about it? Last I heard, he reckoned he might be taking on the Essex Police at law. It's some place for folks running to the law about every little thing! Yet from the regular headlines in this paper, the whole area seems to be riddled with crime. What I can't understand is that the official crime figures seem to show Dale Farm as having less crime than other parts.[/p][/quote]Dale Farm has less crime but more criminals than other parts.[/p][/quote]Can you post up evidence of what you state? If not explain why you stated it if you have no evidence to support it? Of course if you dont we can come to our own conclusions as to why you state it.[/p][/quote]OK I will, after you've posted up the evidence that shows that Dale Farm has less crime than other parts.....I wont hold my breath lol jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

10:44pm Tue 8 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

12:34am Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

10:22am Wed 9 Nov 11

andy:) says...

NightnDay wrote:
People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon?
Really ?. Then why did taxi drivers refuse to pickup/drop people off there ?. There have been numerous reports of weapons/assaults there, not to mention the illegal sofa scam story that the Echo investigated a while back.
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon?[/p][/quote]Really ?. Then why did taxi drivers refuse to pickup/drop people off there ?. There have been numerous reports of weapons/assaults there, not to mention the illegal sofa scam story that the Echo investigated a while back. andy:)
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Wed 9 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back. fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

3:07pm Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
[quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish. jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Wed 9 Nov 11

whataday says...

Point some of the posters above seem to have missed is that residents have had to wait TEN YEARS for the council to enforce action against illegal use.
I should think anybody who has had to suffer that long has got a right to sue the council. I just hope he gets as much legal aid as the cause of the problem did.
Point some of the posters above seem to have missed is that residents have had to wait TEN YEARS for the council to enforce action against illegal use. I should think anybody who has had to suffer that long has got a right to sue the council. I just hope he gets as much legal aid as the cause of the problem did. whataday
  • Score: 0

5:39pm Wed 9 Nov 11

muffindamule says...

Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen !
Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen ! muffindamule
  • Score: 0

7:30pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Mr Ball states today on radio that 39 housing applications from the travellers have been accepted by the council..surely he knows that lie will come back to haunt him as did the 'not a scrap yard, didn't put hard core there" did. he panics and lies not considering. He also states most of the DF people have left the area while ignoring the proof that most are in the legal part. He shuddered at the suggestion that taking court action against those on the legal side was persecution and moved swiftly on. Is there nothing this man wont stoop to? he will be costing the basildon tax payers money long after he is gone. BTW those who have been moved off DF no longer pay council tax. Isnt that what most were concerned about?
Mr Ball states today on radio that 39 housing applications from the travellers have been accepted by the council..surely he knows that lie will come back to haunt him as did the 'not a scrap yard, didn't put hard core there" did. he panics and lies not considering. He also states most of the DF people have left the area while ignoring the proof that most are in the legal part. He shuddered at the suggestion that taking court action against those on the legal side was persecution and moved swiftly on. Is there nothing this man wont stoop to? he will be costing the basildon tax payers money long after he is gone. BTW those who have been moved off DF no longer pay council tax. Isnt that what most were concerned about? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:36pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

andy:) wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon?
Really ?. Then why did taxi drivers refuse to pickup/drop people off there ?. There have been numerous reports of weapons/assaults there, not to mention the illegal sofa scam story that the Echo investigated a while back.
Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.
[quote][p][bold]andy:)[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: People on DF ( illegal part) did't seem to do anything illegal on there which is unusual considering there is 400 souls on there. Can that be said of nay block of 400 people in Basildon?[/p][/quote]Really ?. Then why did taxi drivers refuse to pickup/drop people off there ?. There have been numerous reports of weapons/assaults there, not to mention the illegal sofa scam story that the Echo investigated a while back.[/p][/quote]Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:38pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.
Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:42pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:45pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

whataday wrote:
Point some of the posters above seem to have missed is that residents have had to wait TEN YEARS for the council to enforce action against illegal use.
I should think anybody who has had to suffer that long has got a right to sue the council. I just hope he gets as much legal aid as the cause of the problem did.
Of course he would have to say how he "suffered" He couldnt just say having travellers living next door to him.
If he did use that reason then the fact he was once married to a traveller who dumped( flytipped) him could be used to weaken that charge...
[quote][p][bold]whataday[/bold] wrote: Point some of the posters above seem to have missed is that residents have had to wait TEN YEARS for the council to enforce action against illegal use. I should think anybody who has had to suffer that long has got a right to sue the council. I just hope he gets as much legal aid as the cause of the problem did.[/p][/quote]Of course he would have to say how he "suffered" He couldnt just say having travellers living next door to him. If he did use that reason then the fact he was once married to a traveller who dumped( flytipped) him could be used to weaken that charge... NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:49pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

muffindamule wrote:
Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen !
Do you think such a sign will be erected, will you be erecting it? Where will it be put? on the borders of Basildon...Dont you think Basildon's name has been sullied enough throughout the world? Isn't bad feeling a two way thing in this issue? Do you think the travellers only have good feelings about those who discriminated against them for the time they were there? Stop being holier than thou, you are a petty person if people going about their lives while challenging the law to stay on their lands bothers and interfered with you life so much..ffs get a life.
[quote][p][bold]muffindamule[/bold] wrote: Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen ![/p][/quote]Do you think such a sign will be erected, will you be erecting it? Where will it be put? on the borders of Basildon...Dont you think Basildon's name has been sullied enough throughout the world? Isn't bad feeling a two way thing in this issue? Do you think the travellers only have good feelings about those who discriminated against them for the time they were there? Stop being holier than thou, you are a petty person if people going about their lives while challenging the law to stay on their lands bothers and interfered with you life so much..ffs get a life. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

8:18pm Wed 9 Nov 11

muffindamule says...

NightnDay wrote:
muffindamule wrote:
Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen !
Do you think such a sign will be erected, will you be erecting it? Where will it be put? on the borders of Basildon...Dont you think Basildon's name has been sullied enough throughout the world? Isn't bad feeling a two way thing in this issue? Do you think the travellers only have good feelings about those who discriminated against them for the time they were there? Stop being holier than thou, you are a petty person if people going about their lives while challenging the law to stay on their lands bothers and interfered with you life so much..ffs get a life.
@NightnDay.
I feel the sign would best be erected on the sight of the infamous 'We won't go' sign. I shall not be erecting it as I do not have permission to do so. By your comments you make it obvious that it is too early for such a sign anyway. It would appear that you have failed to grasp what this whole affair has been about !
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muffindamule[/bold] wrote: Our laws have been upheld. The illegal occupants at Dale Farm have been forced to move on and not before time. I am sure that they will be laughing their socks off at the bad feelings and continuing legal wranglings they have left behind them. I look forward to the day when a sign is put up saying 'They've gone - and taken all the bad feelings with them'. Amen ![/p][/quote]Do you think such a sign will be erected, will you be erecting it? Where will it be put? on the borders of Basildon...Dont you think Basildon's name has been sullied enough throughout the world? Isn't bad feeling a two way thing in this issue? Do you think the travellers only have good feelings about those who discriminated against them for the time they were there? Stop being holier than thou, you are a petty person if people going about their lives while challenging the law to stay on their lands bothers and interfered with you life so much..ffs get a life.[/p][/quote]@NightnDay. I feel the sign would best be erected on the sight of the infamous 'We won't go' sign. I shall not be erecting it as I do not have permission to do so. By your comments you make it obvious that it is too early for such a sign anyway. It would appear that you have failed to grasp what this whole affair has been about ! muffindamule
  • Score: 0

8:24pm Wed 9 Nov 11

muffindamule says...

That should read 'site' or, at a pinch, 'within sight of'. :-)
That should read 'site' or, at a pinch, 'within sight of'. :-) muffindamule
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.
that sounds interesting, can you shed a bit more light on that please.
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.[/p][/quote]that sounds interesting, can you shed a bit more light on that please. jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.
that sounds interesting, can you shed a bit more light on that please.
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.[/p][/quote]that sounds interesting, can you shed a bit more light on that please. jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.
Hi, this sounds interesting, can you point me to this article, assuming thats what it is and not just hearsay.
Thanks
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Was there any convictions from what you mention? If yes what is the % compared to the number of people on the illegal site. It is the illegal site we are talking about isnt it? As for taxi companies, there was a case a while back where two companies were in dispute on who had the contrat to take and deliver residents to DF, they were making so much money.[/p][/quote]Hi, this sounds interesting, can you point me to this article, assuming thats what it is and not just hearsay. Thanks jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Wed 9 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie! jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

8:56pm Wed 9 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

Well, we may slowly be getting to the truth behind this whole sorry debacle. It's amazing how low some folk will stoop to further their vested interests.

I sometimes think that the woes of Essex can not be pinned soley on the travelling peoples or the huge influx of displaced cockneys who came into the new towns and so changed the character of a farming area.

It would appear that the commuters who just use the place as a dormitory along with their friends the developers from any old place at all - lets say Nottinghamshire - are the real power lobby here.

At least Sir Leonard of the High Winds has got the guts to say that Dale Farm is worse now than it was before the council started interfering with other people's land.
A quick glance at the before and after pictures on SKY's website ( hardly a pro-traveller outfit, the Murdochs, probably as right wing as the owners of this dear rag)
will clearly show how much work the residents of Dale farm did to clean up the dump and make a pleasant living space in a little field miles from anywhere on a crowded, under-housed island. Look at the 1999 picture compared to the 2011 pre-police invasion photo.

Now look again at the sorry mess the council's agents have made of the place. A right horrible mess! If anybody else did it, they would get jail, although I suppose, at the moment, the prisons of Britain being teeming and overloaded, it wouldn't be practicable.

Right, to get back to the main news about ulterior motives and how things are not always as our bureaucratic rulers tell us,
here is a clip from the Echo:

"
RESIDENTS are demanding answers over the involvement of Basildon Council with proposals to build 1,300 homes on green belt land near Pitsea.

Bowers Gifford and North Benfleet Parish Council raised the questions about the £4.2million purchase of 130 acres of farmland at Little Chalvedon Hall, off Pound Lane, by Nottinghamshire County Council.

When the Echo first reported in July that Nottinghamshire Council had bought the land, a Basildon Council spokesman said it had not been contacted by bosses to discuss potential development of the site.

However, a report released to the Echo by Nottinghamshire Council revealed council officers have been in discussions with agents since June 2010.

Parish councillor Robert Smillie said: “When the councillors were canvassing in May we asked about it, after seeing surveyors on the land. I had a chat with council leader Tony Ball. They all said there were no plans and no one had been in contact with the planning department about it.”

The report was compiled in October 2010 as a recommendation to Nottinghamshire County Council’s pension trust to buy the site as an investment.

The report described the investment as high risk, but added these had been minimised by an agent, Meridian Strategic Land, analysing Basildon planning policy and speaking directly to officers at the council.

It added: “Meridian has had numerous discussions with the local authority planners, highway team, regeneration officer etc, all of whom have not discouraged the initiative.

“Those officers cannot give any positive commitment, but the fact they are not immediately rejecting the proposals, but are positively engaging with Meridian, points to the potential for local support.”

The council confirmed five meetings in June and July 2010, then May, June and July, when councillor Stephen Horgan and Mr Ball attended, this year.

Council leader Tony Ball said senior Tory councillors including himself were aware of the proposals as far back as May, but not that meetings had taken place.

When asked if he should have been informed of the meetings, he said: “I trust officers’ judgments.”
Well, we may slowly be getting to the truth behind this whole sorry debacle. It's amazing how low some folk will stoop to further their vested interests. I sometimes think that the woes of Essex can not be pinned soley on the travelling peoples or the huge influx of displaced cockneys who came into the new towns and so changed the character of a farming area. It would appear that the commuters who just use the place as a dormitory along with their friends the developers from any old place at all - lets say Nottinghamshire - are the real power lobby here. At least Sir Leonard of the High Winds has got the guts to say that Dale Farm is worse now than it was before the council started interfering with other people's land. A quick glance at the before and after pictures on SKY's website ( hardly a pro-traveller outfit, the Murdochs, probably as right wing as the owners of this dear rag) will clearly show how much work the residents of Dale farm did to clean up the dump and make a pleasant living space in a little field miles from anywhere on a crowded, under-housed island. Look at the 1999 picture compared to the 2011 pre-police invasion photo. Now look again at the sorry mess the council's agents have made of the place. A right horrible mess! If anybody else did it, they would get jail, although I suppose, at the moment, the prisons of Britain being teeming and overloaded, it wouldn't be practicable. Right, to get back to the main news about ulterior motives and how things are not always as our bureaucratic rulers tell us, here is a clip from the Echo: " RESIDENTS are demanding answers over the involvement of Basildon Council with proposals to build 1,300 homes on green belt land near Pitsea. Bowers Gifford and North Benfleet Parish Council raised the questions about the £4.2million purchase of 130 acres of farmland at Little Chalvedon Hall, off Pound Lane, by Nottinghamshire County Council. When the Echo first reported in July that Nottinghamshire Council had bought the land, a Basildon Council spokesman said it had not been contacted by bosses to discuss potential development of the site. However, a report released to the Echo by Nottinghamshire Council revealed council officers have been in discussions with agents since June 2010. Parish councillor Robert Smillie said: “When the councillors were canvassing in May we asked about it, after seeing surveyors on the land. I had a chat with council leader Tony Ball. They all said there were no plans and no one had been in contact with the planning department about it.” The report was compiled in October 2010 as a recommendation to Nottinghamshire County Council’s pension trust to buy the site as an investment. The report described the investment as high risk, but added these had been minimised by an agent, Meridian Strategic Land, analysing Basildon planning policy and speaking directly to officers at the council. It added: “Meridian has had numerous discussions with the local authority planners, highway team, regeneration officer etc, all of whom have not discouraged the initiative. “Those officers cannot give any positive commitment, but the fact they are not immediately rejecting the proposals, but are positively engaging with Meridian, points to the potential for local support.” The council confirmed five meetings in June and July 2010, then May, June and July, when councillor Stephen Horgan and Mr Ball attended, this year. Council leader Tony Ball said senior Tory councillors including himself were aware of the proposals as far back as May, but not that meetings had taken place. When asked if he should have been informed of the meetings, he said: “I trust officers’ judgments.” fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

9:54pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

10:09pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Mr Ball involved in lying again. When will people decide they have had enough of this lying scoundrel? What else has/is he lying about.
Mr Ball involved in lying again. When will people decide they have had enough of this lying scoundrel? What else has/is he lying about. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

10:36pm Wed 9 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you!
Cheers,
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you! Cheers, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

11:24pm Wed 9 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you!
Cheers,
Smiffy22
Re: your contentions, do you have evidence of what you contend. There seems to be evidence that male DF residents were there. Are you suggesting the men hid to avoid arrest, or to not confront the police or because they are to a man cowards?
There seems to be a lot of evidence on youtube of Traveller men fighting bare knuckles to solve matter's of honour which wouldn't seem to stack up with what you might be implying. I think your statement needs to be proven in someway or it would seem you are making things up.
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you! Cheers, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]Re: your contentions, do you have evidence of what you contend. There seems to be evidence that male DF residents were there. Are you suggesting the men hid to avoid arrest, or to not confront the police or because they are to a man cowards? There seems to be a lot of evidence on youtube of Traveller men fighting bare knuckles to solve matter's of honour which wouldn't seem to stack up with what you might be implying. I think your statement needs to be proven in someway or it would seem you are making things up. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

1:10pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.[/p][/quote]I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

1:42pm Thu 10 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

Thank you, Smithy22, for pointing this out again.
You reckoned the "criminals" were hiding elsewhere.

Wouldn't it have been better to let Tony know this, BEFORE he ordered the 150 plus armed, riot police to break in? ( cost £8million plus).
Tony said he was acting on "intelligence received". That's why he changed the council's plan and ordered in the riot police to do what the bailiffs were supposed to do.

I think you could have saved the council-tax payers a lot of money, if you'd spoken up before the event and let him know where all these "criminals" you mention are hiding.
It used to be an offence to waste police officers time in the old days.
Maybe Basildon council have managed to "change" the Law of England yet again.

Anyway, Tony, or should I say, Sir Anthony, is still saying that the main reason the council took the steps they did was because of a "planning issue". That's the spiel he's trying to get across to the rest of the country and the rest of the world.
A few of the more astute writers on these DF threads, such as Ironman, for instance, have already said that they realise that the planning business was NOT what really lay behind this expensive, wasteful, pointless, debacle.

I'm inclined to agree that the heavy-handed action springs more from a desire to appease a powerful lobby which has vested property interests and very strong anti-Irish and anti-traveller feelings.

What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne.
I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows?
Thank you, Smithy22, for pointing this out again. You reckoned the "criminals" were hiding elsewhere. Wouldn't it have been better to let Tony know this, BEFORE he ordered the 150 plus armed, riot police to break in? ( cost £8million plus). Tony said he was acting on "intelligence received". That's why he changed the council's plan and ordered in the riot police to do what the bailiffs were supposed to do. I think you could have saved the council-tax payers a lot of money, if you'd spoken up before the event and let him know where all these "criminals" you mention are hiding. It used to be an offence to waste police officers time in the old days. Maybe Basildon council have managed to "change" the Law of England yet again. Anyway, Tony, or should I say, Sir Anthony, is still saying that the main reason the council took the steps they did was because of a "planning issue". That's the spiel he's trying to get across to the rest of the country and the rest of the world. A few of the more astute writers on these DF threads, such as Ironman, for instance, have already said that they realise that the planning business was NOT what really lay behind this expensive, wasteful, pointless, debacle. I'm inclined to agree that the heavy-handed action springs more from a desire to appease a powerful lobby which has vested property interests and very strong anti-Irish and anti-traveller feelings. What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne. I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows? fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

2:41pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol
Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.[/p][/quote]I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol[/p][/quote]Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

3:55pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jxr says...

Loving the "NightnDay Show". What a knob!
Loving the "NightnDay Show". What a knob! jxr
  • Score: 0

4:04pm Thu 10 Nov 11

Lady milly from Billericay says...

I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right !
I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right ! Lady milly from Billericay
  • Score: 0

4:06pm Thu 10 Nov 11

Lady milly from Billericay says...

I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right !
I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right ! Lady milly from Billericay
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jxr wrote:
Loving the "NightnDay Show". What a knob!
I think your post deals with the matter of who is what sufficiently!
[quote][p][bold]jxr[/bold] wrote: Loving the "NightnDay Show". What a knob![/p][/quote]I think your post deals with the matter of who is what sufficiently! NightnDay
  • Score: 0

5:16pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol
Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?
Calm down dear lol

here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.[/p][/quote]I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol[/p][/quote]Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?[/p][/quote]Calm down dear lol here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue! jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

5:17pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Lady milly from Billericay wrote:
I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right !
The thing is council are often guilty of such ridiculous action which really make the more sensible among us wonder just what is wrong with them, Where do they lose toch with reality. The difference this time is the people who cheered on the council, for obvious reasons, while demanding all and sundry believe them when they say its about upholding planning acts. That is where the council say they got their motivation to go the whole hog...These cheerleaders cant complain when cuts are made in the borough and their C/Tax is raised, in fact they have to welcome all that and more. It would be interesting to know if these very same people are so vocal when it comes to other planning issue in basildon, i somehow doubt it after reading some of the atrocious comments n this newspapers threads, which in many many cases were breaking the Public order act 1986 and thus the law, the law they were demanding council uphold. I wonder if those who did this realise they have broken the law and their confession is their actual posts?
[quote][p][bold]Lady milly from Billericay[/bold] wrote: I'm not sure what Len gridley expected when the travellers were evicted from Dale farm. It was a scrap yard before the travellers set up home there and now it's a huge mess . It's never been a haven of loveliness and is never likely to be as it's owned by the travellers and why would they want to improve it for the residents who hate them . The council only interest is to prevent travellers moving back on they don't care what it looks like. If it wasn't so awful it would actually be funny. Travellers moved off Dale farm onto the legal pitch so they are still in CRays HIll enabling the council as protectors of the green belt to turn it into a muddy mess much to the anger of local residents. Serves them right ![/p][/quote]The thing is council are often guilty of such ridiculous action which really make the more sensible among us wonder just what is wrong with them, Where do they lose toch with reality. The difference this time is the people who cheered on the council, for obvious reasons, while demanding all and sundry believe them when they say its about upholding planning acts. That is where the council say they got their motivation to go the whole hog...These cheerleaders cant complain when cuts are made in the borough and their C/Tax is raised, in fact they have to welcome all that and more. It would be interesting to know if these very same people are so vocal when it comes to other planning issue in basildon, i somehow doubt it after reading some of the atrocious comments n this newspapers threads, which in many many cases were breaking the Public order act 1986 and thus the law, the law they were demanding council uphold. I wonder if those who did this realise they have broken the law and their confession is their actual posts? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

6:20pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol
Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?
Calm down dear lol

here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue!
Is this the legal side or the illegal side or all side's of every traveller site in the land? Any crime for the illegal side?
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.[/p][/quote]I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol[/p][/quote]Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?[/p][/quote]Calm down dear lol here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue![/p][/quote]Is this the legal side or the illegal side or all side's of every traveller site in the land? Any crime for the illegal side? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

6:32pm Thu 10 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

It seems obvious by now that most of the anti-traveller "locals" don't know much about the realities at Dale Farm , or, have been ordered by the Conservative and unionist party/Basildon council/ their bosses up in London or even Nottingham.

However, "Sir Leonard" of the High Winds is quite right when he says that the council have made a right bad mess of the place. It's probably never been in such a shocking state in living memory even when it was a scrapyard used by the councils.
For evidence on the 'net, from a very anti-traveller and right wing paper, please take a look at the really good photos provided by the
DAILY MAIL.
These are even better than the ones I pointed out yesterday, provided by the Murdoch's outfit ( Sky).

Just make sure you extend your google search to 50, as the authorities are very embarrassed by this fiasco, and are desperately hoping the problem will just go away.

A total botch up, covered up, nonsense, that will set Basildon back for years to come!

Who is going to invest in any of those lovely chalets made locally and sold locally at the garden centres, now that folk know that the council are likely to send in the armed, riot police just so their agents can make a dirty, stinking, health-risking mess?

And all for the vested interests of a few greedy lobbyists.
Isn't it time the good people of England to take back control of this unlucky part of Essex and wrestle it out of the hands of the likes of former Lords who are barred from the House of Lords and bureaucrats who make secret deals with other local authorities to sell off REALLY NICE GREEN greenbelt down Pitsea way?
(Pictured in yesterday's Echo).
It seems obvious by now that most of the anti-traveller "locals" don't know much about the realities at Dale Farm , or, have been ordered by the Conservative and unionist party/Basildon council/ their bosses up in London or even Nottingham. However, "Sir Leonard" of the High Winds is quite right when he says that the council have made a right bad mess of the place. It's probably never been in such a shocking state in living memory even when it was a scrapyard used by the councils. For evidence on the 'net, from a very anti-traveller and right wing paper, please take a look at the really good photos provided by the DAILY MAIL. These are even better than the ones I pointed out yesterday, provided by the Murdoch's outfit ( Sky). Just make sure you extend your google search to 50, as the authorities are very embarrassed by this fiasco, and are desperately hoping the problem will just go away. A total botch up, covered up, nonsense, that will set Basildon back for years to come! Who is going to invest in any of those lovely chalets made locally and sold locally at the garden centres, now that folk know that the council are likely to send in the armed, riot police just so their agents can make a dirty, stinking, health-risking mess? And all for the vested interests of a few greedy lobbyists. Isn't it time the good people of England to take back control of this unlucky part of Essex and wrestle it out of the hands of the likes of former Lords who are barred from the House of Lords and bureaucrats who make secret deals with other local authorities to sell off REALLY NICE GREEN greenbelt down Pitsea way? (Pictured in yesterday's Echo). fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Thu 10 Nov 11

Lady milly from Billericay says...

Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them. Lady milly from Billericay
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Thu 10 Nov 11

Lady milly from Billericay says...

Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them. Lady milly from Billericay
  • Score: 0

6:42pm Thu 10 Nov 11

Lady milly from Billericay says...

Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them. Lady milly from Billericay
  • Score: 0

6:46pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.
Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF
is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie!
but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.
I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol
Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?
Calm down dear lol

here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue!
Is this the legal side or the illegal side or all side's of every traveller site in the land? Any crime for the illegal side?
lol are you seriously implying that the residents of the legal side behave in a different lawful manner than the residents from the illegal side? they are one and the same. The same family owns the whole legal/illegal site.
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]The crime figures in Crays Hill are no reflection on how many criminals reside at Dale Farm, one small part of the parish.[/p][/quote]Couldn't it also be said that the low crime figues for Dale Farm is no reflection on the criminals that resides in Crays hill? You are being carelessly disingenuous in you haste to denigrate the people of, The illegal side, of DF[/p][/quote]is there published crime figures for Dale Farm? think you might have been a bit disingenuous yourself there, but don't hesitate to post them on here if they exist and I'll warm my humble pie![/p][/quote]but surely the onus is on you to show figures that you are implying that prove your contention that DF is a criminal culture/enterprise. A FOI to the Essex police might get you the information you would need to prove what you state. of course The legal side of DF is made up of two distinct communities. One cant be held responsible for the other.[/p][/quote]I'll put the pie back in the freezer then, seeing as how you like to spout nonsense that you hope no one will pick you up on lol[/p][/quote]Im sorry you post that dale farm is mad up of criminals and when ask to substantiate that you demand others prove what you say snt the case! Its you thats spouting rubbish hoping it will slip by unchallenged. If you have any proof of WHAT YOU POST can you provide it?[/p][/quote]Calm down dear lol here's just a few to get you on your way. Convicted fraudster Richard Sheridan, Convicted rapist Jeremiah O'Brien and Sam Vinden.....who erm hasn't done anything...nothing at all, least not whilst he's in the pay of the boys in blue![/p][/quote]Is this the legal side or the illegal side or all side's of every traveller site in the land? Any crime for the illegal side?[/p][/quote]lol are you seriously implying that the residents of the legal side behave in a different lawful manner than the residents from the illegal side? they are one and the same. The same family owns the whole legal/illegal site. jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

6:49pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Any sin is condoned by the sheeple of basildon in regards to the council as long as they keep bashing the Travellers. "£55,000 per human being on DF?, pfffft, cheap at double the price"
Any sin is condoned by the sheeple of basildon in regards to the council as long as they keep bashing the Travellers. "£55,000 per human being on DF?, pfffft, cheap at double the price" NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:49pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:32pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
They cocked up big time there, it was Katherine McCann not Kathleen McCarthy that is being investigated over slavery allegations!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come?[/p][/quote]They cocked up big time there, it was Katherine McCann not Kathleen McCarthy that is being investigated over slavery allegations! jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya! jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

9:45pm Thu 10 Nov 11

MrsPloppy says...

NightnDay wrote:
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
WTF, do newspapers lie to us?!?!?
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come?[/p][/quote]WTF, do newspapers lie to us?!?!? MrsPloppy
  • Score: 0

9:45pm Thu 10 Nov 11

MrsPloppy says...

"What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne.
I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows?"

Pure class, lol.
"What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne. I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows?" Pure class, lol. MrsPloppy
  • Score: 0

9:48pm Thu 10 Nov 11

MrsPloppy says...

So it may turn out that it is actually Lord Len Gridley possibly on the make from land values.

Warning, the value of your investment may go up or down.
So it may turn out that it is actually Lord Len Gridley possibly on the make from land values. Warning, the value of your investment may go up or down. MrsPloppy
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you! NightnDay
  • Score: 0

10:27pm Thu 10 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW?
Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved?
None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW? Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:31pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW?
Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved?
I've often wondered what he does for a living too! Anyone know?
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW? Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved?[/p][/quote]I've often wondered what he does for a living too! Anyone know? jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Thu 10 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Sorry all this scrolling up and down is doing my eyes in, can you copy and post the quote of mine that you are referring to

Thanks
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Sorry all this scrolling up and down is doing my eyes in, can you copy and post the quote of mine that you are referring to Thanks jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Fri 11 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!"

"Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!"
Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!" "Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!" NightnDay
  • Score: 0

2:40pm Fri 11 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Does anyone know if Len The gunman Gridley has been dealt with for arson...and has he got his firearms back? I feel a FOI request coming on.
Does anyone know if Len The gunman Gridley has been dealt with for arson...and has he got his firearms back? I feel a FOI request coming on. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Fri 11 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly.....
once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!"

"Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!"
Sorry, once again, can I ask for you to post the actual comment I made which you state could be deemed as racist, you have only posted a later riposte.

Thanks
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly..... once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!" "Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!"[/p][/quote]Sorry, once again, can I ask for you to post the actual comment I made which you state could be deemed as racist, you have only posted a later riposte. Thanks jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Fri 11 Nov 11

jimmyboy1984 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly.....
once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!"

"Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!"
Sorry, once again, can I ask for you to post the actual comment I made which you state could be deemed as racist, you have only posted a later riposte.

Thanks
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Im certain you know which one but ill paste it and my response. "Certainly..... once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!" "Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!"[/p][/quote]Sorry, once again, can I ask for you to post the actual comment I made which you state could be deemed as racist, you have only posted a later riposte. Thanks jimmyboy1984
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Fri 11 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on!

Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing
Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM

Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches.

John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month.

Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation.

A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010.

Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London.

Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten.

He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life.

Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal.

The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14.

Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies.


Read more: http://www.irishexam
iner.com/breakingnew
s/world/former-resid
ents-of-dale-farm-to
-ask-judge-for-suita
ble-rehousing-528024
.html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs
Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on! Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches. John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month. Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation. A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010. Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London. Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten. He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life. Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal. The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14. Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies. Read more: http://www.irishexam iner.com/breakingnew s/world/former-resid ents-of-dale-farm-to -ask-judge-for-suita ble-rehousing-528024 .html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs NightnDay
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Fri 11 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW?
Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved?
I've often wondered what he does for a living too! Anyone know?
Perhaps he is a professional prat lol...I think there are legal people looking at what Len Len The machine gun man does for a living? Why hasn't of his supporters replied, could it be they dont know? or even more sinister do know?
[quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: None of the supporters of Len the Shotgun have replied to the post of what he does for a living? ANYBODY KNOW? Is there any truth in the rumour that Private investigators are now involved?[/p][/quote]I've often wondered what he does for a living too! Anyone know?[/p][/quote]Perhaps he is a professional prat lol...I think there are legal people looking at what Len Len The machine gun man does for a living? Why hasn't of his supporters replied, could it be they dont know? or even more sinister do know? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:52pm Fri 11 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...
Oh dear!
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear! NightnDay
  • Score: 0

8:24pm Fri 11 Nov 11

muffindamule says...

NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...

Oh dear!
I think it is more likely to be that NightnDay has bored the arse off everyone with nearly forty comments on this page alone ! Either that or most of the other commentators are busy trying to decipher those comments and make some semblance of sense out of them. I, for one, having given up on that for the time being. ;-)
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]I think it is more likely to be that NightnDay has bored the arse off everyone with nearly forty comments on this page alone ! Either that or most of the other commentators are busy trying to decipher those comments and make some semblance of sense out of them. I, for one, having given up on that for the time being. ;-) muffindamule
  • Score: 0

1:09am Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

muffindamule wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...


Oh dear!
I think it is more likely to be that NightnDay has bored the arse off everyone with nearly forty comments on this page alone ! Either that or most of the other commentators are busy trying to decipher those comments and make some semblance of sense out of them. I, for one, having given up on that for the time being. ;-)
Well you understood the one you replied to...I see, if the truth or a challenge is given then you dont understand...good tactic. Any comment on The new appeals ? The compensation paid to one of the owners of land on DF.
[quote][p][bold]muffindamule[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]I think it is more likely to be that NightnDay has bored the arse off everyone with nearly forty comments on this page alone ! Either that or most of the other commentators are busy trying to decipher those comments and make some semblance of sense out of them. I, for one, having given up on that for the time being. ;-)[/p][/quote]Well you understood the one you replied to...I see, if the truth or a challenge is given then you dont understand...good tactic. Any comment on The new appeals ? The compensation paid to one of the owners of land on DF. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Sat 12 Nov 11

Kim Gandy says...

geezer, innit wrote:
He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission.



I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.
you try living next to them then
[quote][p][bold]geezer, innit[/bold] wrote: [quote]He claims the council has affecte dhis house price by taking too long to clear the site and has allowed families to increase the size of the legal site from 34 to around 40 pitches without planning permission. [/quote] I thought that he didn't want to sell his house.[/p][/quote]you try living next to them then Kim Gandy
  • Score: 0

8:29pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
fearsiuil wrote:
It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what.

I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled.

Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media.

For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves.
Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help.
Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details.

However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.
Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you!
Cheers,
Smiffy22
Re: your contentions, do you have evidence of what you contend. There seems to be evidence that male DF residents were there. Are you suggesting the men hid to avoid arrest, or to not confront the police or because they are to a man cowards?
There seems to be a lot of evidence on youtube of Traveller men fighting bare knuckles to solve matter's of honour which wouldn't seem to stack up with what you might be implying. I think your statement needs to be proven in someway or it would seem you are making things up.
Err - the video evidence! Yes, there may have been a few traveller men present at the time, but how many did you see (in comparison to the number of women, if you want relative terms)? How about anyone else, did any of you see any sign of the majority of the menfolk? I certainly didn't and I was not the only one to remark upon there absence (bar one or two perhaps, in case you want to split hairs!).
I have made no unjust assumptions, I merely drew the only conclusion that most obviously fitted the other fact you noticed, which was that there were not lots of arrests of traveller menfolk! I did NOT say they were hiding for reasons of cowardice (those were your words). In any case, bareknuckle fighting certainly does not preclude cowardice - poor evidence indeed sir, if evidence were needed. It is absolutely not a sign of honour either in any modern society. Most (well, probably all I suspect) civilised societies would see this as a most dishonourable way of deciding a dipute, quite apart from the fact that it decides a dispute on ability to fight rather than fairness or just-ness of the individual's position. What makes you think that the just side of a dispute is the one that will automatically win a bareknuckle fight? Quite a primitive idea, actually, and rather repulsive.
Regards,
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: It looks like we're going round in circles again here. It gets hard working out who is saying what and who is asking what. I suppose we really need the return of an authority like "Wayne G" who used to be a prolific writer on threads about travellers. Just before he suddenly vanished, he took to putting up quotes from websites he had googled. Maybe that's what anyone who wants written answers will have to do., though it's probably true that we cannot believe everything that appears on the 'Net or in the media. For the crime figures that show Crays Hill to be fairly good ( especially for Essex/East London region), there are several sources, but it may be best to approach Essex Police themselves. Also, the Council have a PR department of sorts. They may be able to help. Of course, anyone with knowledge of crime should get in touch with the authorities immediately and report the details. However, as I mentioned before on one of these threads, it seems unlikely that 150 plus armed, riot police would fail to take the opportunity and arrest all the so-called "criminals" that so-called "local residents" chat about. So I suppose we shall see a huge week of court cases up and coming, rather like we had after all the house-dwellers rioted up town a while back.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, not again fearsiuil. I did explain it to you last time you trotted out the question as to why there were not plenty of "criminals" arrested when they took control of Dale Farm. As was noticed and pointed out over and over again, there were very few or no traveller men to be seen, they were hiding elsewhere for this very reason, leaving their women and a few unwashed rent-a-mob types to do their fighting for them. Thank you for once again allowing us to point out the obvious to you! Cheers, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]Re: your contentions, do you have evidence of what you contend. There seems to be evidence that male DF residents were there. Are you suggesting the men hid to avoid arrest, or to not confront the police or because they are to a man cowards? There seems to be a lot of evidence on youtube of Traveller men fighting bare knuckles to solve matter's of honour which wouldn't seem to stack up with what you might be implying. I think your statement needs to be proven in someway or it would seem you are making things up.[/p][/quote]Err - the video evidence! Yes, there may have been a few traveller men present at the time, but how many did you see (in comparison to the number of women, if you want relative terms)? How about anyone else, did any of you see any sign of the majority of the menfolk? I certainly didn't and I was not the only one to remark upon there absence (bar one or two perhaps, in case you want to split hairs!). I have made no unjust assumptions, I merely drew the only conclusion that most obviously fitted the other fact you noticed, which was that there were not lots of arrests of traveller menfolk! I did NOT say they were hiding for reasons of cowardice (those were your words). In any case, bareknuckle fighting certainly does not preclude cowardice - poor evidence indeed sir, if evidence were needed. It is absolutely not a sign of honour either in any modern society. Most (well, probably all I suspect) civilised societies would see this as a most dishonourable way of deciding a dipute, quite apart from the fact that it decides a dispute on ability to fight rather than fairness or just-ness of the individual's position. What makes you think that the just side of a dispute is the one that will automatically win a bareknuckle fight? Quite a primitive idea, actually, and rather repulsive. Regards, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

8:36pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...

Oh dear!
..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them.
As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course).
If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them. As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course). If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity! smiffy22
  • Score: 0

8:36pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...

Oh dear!
..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them.
As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course).
If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them. As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course). If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity! smiffy22
  • Score: 0

8:48pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

Lady milly from Billericay wrote:
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts.
What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this.
The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time.
It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.
[quote][p][bold]Lady milly from Billericay[/bold] wrote: Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.[/p][/quote]How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts. What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this. The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time. It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers. smiffy22
  • Score: 0

8:48pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

Lady milly from Billericay wrote:
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts.
What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this.
The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time.
It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.
[quote][p][bold]Lady milly from Billericay[/bold] wrote: Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.[/p][/quote]How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts. What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this. The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time. It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers. smiffy22
  • Score: 0

9:24pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place... smiffy22
  • Score: 0

9:25pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
...just a flash in the pan!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come?[/p][/quote]...just a flash in the pan! smiffy22
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Sat 12 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on!

Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing
Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM

Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches.

John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month.

Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation.

A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010.

Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London.

Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten.

He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life.

Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal.

The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14.

Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies.


Read more: http://www.irishexam
iner.com/breakingnew
s/world/former-resid
ents-of-dale-farm-to
-ask-judge-for-suita
ble-rehousing-528024
.html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs
"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense?
Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us!
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on! Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches. John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month. Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation. A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010. Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London. Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten. He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life. Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal. The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14. Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies. Read more: http://www.irishexam iner.com/breakingnew s/world/former-resid ents-of-dale-farm-to -ask-judge-for-suita ble-rehousing-528024 .html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs[/p][/quote]"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense? Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us! smiffy22
  • Score: 0

10:47pm Sat 12 Nov 11

fearsiuil says...

The sensible and most economic thing to have done would be to leave folk who wanted to live on their own camp in a field just get on with it.

The planning discrepancies could be ironed out.

If any wrong doing occurred, then the responsible authorities, be it the Essex Police or people like "Wayne G" - Benefits Officer and Fraud Investigator - should do their job properly and put an end to it.

I think it would be far too pessimistic to say that this is impossible.
If the council really thought that we would end up with a situation that's out of control, then they should have bought the land themselves for £120 grand.
Now their latest price estimates value the devastated, messy, field at about £2K per acre.
And folk are homeless needlessly.

All that I propose above could have been sorted out for a miniscule fraction of the probable £22 MILLION of TAXPAYERS' MONEY, and without the pointless devastation and misery.

There IS no law thay says humans have to live in houses, and, if folk want to live in their own way on their own land, what's the point of forcing them onto a housing list that is already hard-pressed and failing to cope.

That's the trouble with bureaucrats; because they're weak, yes men, lacking any original thought in their head,
they expect everybody else to be equally high maintenance, paper memo dependent, subservient, Quislings and weaklings,
who are totally hooked on hanging on to the Gravy Train steered by their bosses at HQ.

I know their culture makes them think that they're doing the right thing as they cram onto their commuter trains daily, fret about mortgages, rents, council taxes, cost of fuel, etc etc, but
there is no God-given directive that folk must exist like that.
Any one who steps back and THINKS about life, will see that so many aspects of modern life are a complete waste of time and resources.
The bee in the bonnet will be the "greenbelt" today, the huge "carbon tax" tomorrow that the authorities bring in.

And yes, the Conservative and unionist party councillors WILL BUILD on the Greenbelt, whatever they told you.

Btw, I've asked several times: does anybody know what's going on at Bury Farm lane?
The sensible and most economic thing to have done would be to leave folk who wanted to live on their own camp in a field just get on with it. The planning discrepancies could be ironed out. If any wrong doing occurred, then the responsible authorities, be it the Essex Police or people like "Wayne G" - Benefits Officer and Fraud Investigator - should do their job properly and put an end to it. I think it would be far too pessimistic to say that this is impossible. If the council really thought that we would end up with a situation that's out of control, then they should have bought the land themselves for £120 grand. Now their latest price estimates value the devastated, messy, field at about £2K per acre. And folk are homeless needlessly. All that I propose above could have been sorted out for a miniscule fraction of the probable £22 MILLION of TAXPAYERS' MONEY, and without the pointless devastation and misery. There IS no law thay says humans have to live in houses, and, if folk want to live in their own way on their own land, what's the point of forcing them onto a housing list that is already hard-pressed and failing to cope. That's the trouble with bureaucrats; because they're weak, yes men, lacking any original thought in their head, they expect everybody else to be equally high maintenance, paper memo dependent, subservient, Quislings and weaklings, who are totally hooked on hanging on to the Gravy Train steered by their bosses at HQ. I know their culture makes them think that they're doing the right thing as they cram onto their commuter trains daily, fret about mortgages, rents, council taxes, cost of fuel, etc etc, but there is no God-given directive that folk must exist like that. Any one who steps back and THINKS about life, will see that so many aspects of modern life are a complete waste of time and resources. The bee in the bonnet will be the "greenbelt" today, the huge "carbon tax" tomorrow that the authorities bring in. And yes, the Conservative and unionist party councillors WILL BUILD on the Greenbelt, whatever they told you. Btw, I've asked several times: does anybody know what's going on at Bury Farm lane? fearsiuil
  • Score: 0

11:02pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...


Oh dear!
..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them.
As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course).
If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity!
Justice done? What justice was that? Would you support justice if a judge makes the council provide a site for those they evicted? paid them compensation for over enforcing? etc etc.

not pre-occupied with traveller hatred! Do you mean they also visit forums dealing with other ethnic minorities in the news in this paper to abuse them too?

Who are you or they to say who they want to live in the country with? If the majority said they didn't want to live with black people should the black people be deported somewhere?

As it was also said before the people of DF were born in this country with over 100 children born on Dale farm itself! The usual rubbish about paying way gets pulled out like some party trick...Have you even the slightest evidence, other than stereotypical myth, that they dont pay their way? HAVE YOU? If not why do you say it?

If there is any sort of new site in the area this forum will indeed be glowing red, red as in necks!
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them. As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course). If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity![/p][/quote]Justice done? What justice was that? Would you support justice if a judge makes the council provide a site for those they evicted? paid them compensation for over enforcing? etc etc. not pre-occupied with traveller hatred! Do you mean they also visit forums dealing with other ethnic minorities in the news in this paper to abuse them too? Who are you or they to say who they want to live in the country with? If the majority said they didn't want to live with black people should the black people be deported somewhere? As it was also said before the people of DF were born in this country with over 100 children born on Dale farm itself! The usual rubbish about paying way gets pulled out like some party trick...Have you even the slightest evidence, other than stereotypical myth, that they dont pay their way? HAVE YOU? If not why do you say it? If there is any sort of new site in the area this forum will indeed be glowing red, red as in necks! NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:19pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
Lady milly from Billericay wrote:
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts.
What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this.
The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time.
It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.
How can you possibly say the travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have acquired then say anecdotal evidence, which in many ways is stereotypical myth, is allowable when speaking about them? "Ordinary people" Are you suggesting the Travellers are extraordinary? Of course ordinary people do waste time maligning people, it happens all the time.

The fact people through their ignorance, prejudice/bigotry/ra
cism (delete as appropriate) feel/think crime increases doesnt make it fact or indeed excuse the negatively displayed in regards to travellers. racism is still very much in view when it come to the traveller.

The mass media which controls the hearts and minds of the majority of the sheeple in this country gives them the push to display their hate/prejudice that they can no longer display to other ethic minorities. The reason why they cant? Because the establishment and the propaganda arm of that, the mass media, has made it unsociable to do so. Travellers are the scapegoats. Ask yourself this, what other ethnic minority would people be able to verbally attack as they have on these forums without fear of the knock on the door. Can you imagine for instance any such post on Black/Asian ethnic groups? The Traveller is allowed to be discriminated against but only with the permission of the establishment.
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lady milly from Billericay[/bold] wrote: Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.[/p][/quote]How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts. What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this. The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time. It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.[/p][/quote]How can you possibly say the travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have acquired then say anecdotal evidence, which in many ways is stereotypical myth, is allowable when speaking about them? "Ordinary people" Are you suggesting the Travellers are extraordinary? Of course ordinary people do waste time maligning people, it happens all the time. The fact people through their ignorance, prejudice/bigotry/ra cism (delete as appropriate) feel/think crime increases doesnt make it fact or indeed excuse the negatively displayed in regards to travellers. racism is still very much in view when it come to the traveller. The mass media which controls the hearts and minds of the majority of the sheeple in this country gives them the push to display their hate/prejudice that they can no longer display to other ethic minorities. The reason why they cant? Because the establishment and the propaganda arm of that, the mass media, has made it unsociable to do so. Travellers are the scapegoats. Ask yourself this, what other ethnic minority would people be able to verbally attack as they have on these forums without fear of the knock on the door. Can you imagine for instance any such post on Black/Asian ethnic groups? The Traveller is allowed to be discriminated against but only with the permission of the establishment. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:24pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG...
lol...
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...[/p][/quote]LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG... lol... NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:27pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
...just a flash in the pan!
Im sure you subscribe to the paper and im sure the lady in question would thank you if she could for the money you have given to her on a plate by lies by your favorite editor lol....can you get them to report something about me, i could do with a christmas holiday. "flash in the pan" smithy? you dumb!..lol....
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come?[/p][/quote]...just a flash in the pan![/p][/quote]Im sure you subscribe to the paper and im sure the lady in question would thank you if she could for the money you have given to her on a plate by lies by your favorite editor lol....can you get them to report something about me, i could do with a christmas holiday. "flash in the pan" smithy? you dumb!..lol.... NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:27pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery.

Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month.

Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story.

It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour.

"In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all.

"Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation."

Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused.

Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time".

The start of things to come?
...just a flash in the pan!
Im sure you subscribe to the paper and im sure the lady in question would thank you if she could for the money you have given to her on a plate by lies by your favorite editor lol....can you get them to report something about me, i could do with a christmas holiday. "flash in the pan" smithy? you dumb!..lol....
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: A Dale Farm resident in Essex has accepted substantial undisclosed libel damages over a claim that she was to be investigated over allegations of slavery. Grandmother Kathleen McCarthy, who has been a central figure in the campaign over the site, had complained about an article in the People which appeared last month. Her advocate, Martin Soames, told Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court that MGN Ltd had acknowledged its error in publishing the story. It claimed that the 48-year-old widow was to be investigated over slavery allegations within the Irish traveller community at Toddbury Farm, Bedfordshire, and would be interviewed by the police over allegations of forced labour. "In fact the allegations are untrue. Our client has no previous convictions nor has she been contacted by Luton and Bedfordshire Police or any other police force in relation to forced labour, under the Slavery and Servitude Act 2010 or indeed any offence at all. "Luton and Bedfordshire Constabulary have confirmed that our client is not under investigation, and that they do not have any intention of interviewing her in relation to any such investigation." Mr Soames said the newspaper had agreed to pay Mrs McCarthy substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs. Its advocate, Harry Kinmonth, said it regretted publishing the article and apologised for the damage and distress caused. Mrs McCarthy was not in court but said, in a statement, that she was "happy with this positive result during a very difficult time". The start of things to come?[/p][/quote]...just a flash in the pan![/p][/quote]Im sure you subscribe to the paper and im sure the lady in question would thank you if she could for the money you have given to her on a plate by lies by your favorite editor lol....can you get them to report something about me, i could do with a christmas holiday. "flash in the pan" smithy? you dumb!..lol.... NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:31pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Are you putting yourself in the "intelligent person" bracket? IF you are then it really shouldn't need explaining to you should it? If your not then explaining it isn't going to help you is it?
Are you putting yourself in the "intelligent person" bracket? IF you are then it really shouldn't need explaining to you should it? If your not then explaining it isn't going to help you is it? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Sat 12 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL
The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:03pm Sun 13 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Seems the council has admitted what they are really about in regards to DF here is a snippet of a report..." The Basildon Council solicitor (Brown) has said this morning in front of legal
observers that her job is to make all of Dale Farm "unlivable" " Even though this site is now legal and the people living there are entitled to be there! More court cases are in the making and more money out of the Taxpayers purse. When will this council decide the TP cant pay more to save the face of this out of control council and its leader looking for MP status?
Seems the council has admitted what they are really about in regards to DF here is a snippet of a report..." The Basildon Council solicitor (Brown) has said this morning in front of legal observers that her job is to make all of Dale Farm "unlivable" " Even though this site is now legal and the people living there are entitled to be there! More court cases are in the making and more money out of the Taxpayers purse. When will this council decide the TP cant pay more to save the face of this out of control council and its leader looking for MP status? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:09pm Sun 13 Nov 11

MrsPloppy says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on!

Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing
Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM

Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches.

John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month.

Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation.

A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010.

Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London.

Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten.

He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life.

Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal.

The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14.

Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies.


Read more: http://www.irishexam

iner.com/breakingnew

s/world/former-resid

ents-of-dale-farm-to

-ask-judge-for-suita

ble-rehousing-528024

.html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs
"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense?
Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us!
Would you be able to go on the road living with people of a different culture so easily?

"Gypsies and Travellers face widespread discrimination and prejudice. Even where they do not meet with outright hostility, they often find that people, including service providers, have
very little knowledge of their culture, history and traditions.

Those in bricks-and-mortar housing share all the issues facing the community as a whole, while also having their own particular concerns. Specific issues include difficulty in
settling into mainstream accommodation, stress, isolation, and
worsening health problem"

‘Its like telling settled people, “You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you” – that’s how it feels, living in a house.’

Female English Gypsy, Shelter focus group

http://england.shelt
er.org.uk/__data/****
ets/pdf_file/0010/57
772/Working_with_hou
sed_Gypsies_and_Trav
ellers.pdf
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on! Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches. John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month. Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation. A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010. Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London. Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten. He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life. Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal. The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14. Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies. Read more: http://www.irishexam iner.com/breakingnew s/world/former-resid ents-of-dale-farm-to -ask-judge-for-suita ble-rehousing-528024 .html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs[/p][/quote]"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense? Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us![/p][/quote]Would you be able to go on the road living with people of a different culture so easily? "Gypsies and Travellers face widespread discrimination and prejudice. Even where they do not meet with outright hostility, they often find that people, including service providers, have very little knowledge of their culture, history and traditions. Those in bricks-and-mortar housing share all the issues facing the community as a whole, while also having their own particular concerns. Specific issues include difficulty in settling into mainstream accommodation, stress, isolation, and worsening health problem" ‘Its like telling settled people, “You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you” – that’s how it feels, living in a house.’ Female English Gypsy, Shelter focus group http://england.shelt er.org.uk/__data/**** ets/pdf_file/0010/57 772/Working_with_hou sed_Gypsies_and_Trav ellers.pdf MrsPloppy
  • Score: 0

9:11pm Sun 13 Nov 11

MrsPloppy says...

"Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book!"

Who cares what's in your book, it's irrelevant and if truth be known, you sound like you have an aversion to books.
"Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book!" Who cares what's in your book, it's irrelevant and if truth be known, you sound like you have an aversion to books. MrsPloppy
  • Score: 0

9:56pm Sun 13 Nov 11

muffindamule says...

NightnDay wrote:
Seems the council has admitted what they are really about in regards to DF here is a snippet of a report..." The Basildon Council solicitor (Brown) has said this morning in front of legal
observers that her job is to make all of Dale Farm "unlivable" " Even though this site is now legal and the people living there are entitled to be there! More court cases are in the making and more money out of the Taxpayers purse. When will this council decide the TP cant pay more to save the face of this out of control council and its leader looking for MP status?
Where can we read the full report ? When and where were these alleged comments made ? Who were the legal observers?
If the comments were made as you claim and in the context you imply then I would be very surprised and very concerned indeed. I don't believe they were. So, which report is it and where can it be found ?
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Seems the council has admitted what they are really about in regards to DF here is a snippet of a report..." The Basildon Council solicitor (Brown) has said this morning in front of legal observers that her job is to make all of Dale Farm "unlivable" " Even though this site is now legal and the people living there are entitled to be there! More court cases are in the making and more money out of the Taxpayers purse. When will this council decide the TP cant pay more to save the face of this out of control council and its leader looking for MP status?[/p][/quote]Where can we read the full report ? When and where were these alleged comments made ? Who were the legal observers? If the comments were made as you claim and in the context you imply then I would be very surprised and very concerned indeed. I don't believe they were. So, which report is it and where can it be found ? muffindamule
  • Score: 0

3:13am Mon 14 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition...


Oh dear!
..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them.
As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course).
If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity!
Justice done? What justice was that? Would you support justice if a judge makes the council provide a site for those they evicted? paid them compensation for over enforcing? etc etc.

not pre-occupied with traveller hatred! Do you mean they also visit forums dealing with other ethnic minorities in the news in this paper to abuse them too?

Who are you or they to say who they want to live in the country with? If the majority said they didn't want to live with black people should the black people be deported somewhere?

As it was also said before the people of DF were born in this country with over 100 children born on Dale farm itself! The usual rubbish about paying way gets pulled out like some party trick...Have you even the slightest evidence, other than stereotypical myth, that they dont pay their way? HAVE YOU? If not why do you say it?

If there is any sort of new site in the area this forum will indeed be glowing red, red as in necks!
Oh good grief, please apply some logic to your arguments before applying fingers to keyboards;
No - I would not "support" justice if that involved a judge made the council provide a site to replace Dale Farm or pay money to the travellers - why one earth would I or any other right-minded person? I would write to my MP and complain, and use my vote to effect whatever change I could. What I would not do is stage a violent protest and enlist the help of the great unwashed.
The majority have not said they don't want to live with black/yellow/red or any other particular type of people. They just want to live with civilised law-abiding people and most Black/yellow/red people are indeed law-abiding civilised people, just as per the majority population. This is not about race, travellers and their supporters keep playing this card in the hope that it will enlist the support of the PC brigade, but it is generally not happening (thank goodness).
And no, take a look and I am sure you will see that those opposing the DF travellers on these sites are not now busy visiting other forums to complain about "other ethnic minorities" - what a ridiculous and unfounded claim to make!
Oh, and it's no good calling people ed-necks just because they want to live in a fair and civilised society; you demean yourself when you resort to name-calling just as some of those that opposed the DF travellers demean themselves when they resort to the same.

Regards,
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Has it suddenly gone deadly quiet on all the DF threads? lol...Nw why would that be. Perhaps people are working overtime to pay for Mr Balls mistakes/ambition... Oh dear![/p][/quote]..because contrary to the bleating of the pro-traveller bunch, people are not pre-occupied with a hatred for travellers! For one thing, they just wanted to see that justice was at least seen to be underway (if not totally done - is it ever!), and for another, they just do not want to be plagued with travellers and the problems they experience with them. As I have said before, British people are in the main extreemly tollerant of people living their own way, provided that those people do not harm them and provided those people pay their own way (within their ability of course). If there is any chance of another illegal growth of traveller site in their area you can be sure these columns will again be growing red with activity![/p][/quote]Justice done? What justice was that? Would you support justice if a judge makes the council provide a site for those they evicted? paid them compensation for over enforcing? etc etc. not pre-occupied with traveller hatred! Do you mean they also visit forums dealing with other ethnic minorities in the news in this paper to abuse them too? Who are you or they to say who they want to live in the country with? If the majority said they didn't want to live with black people should the black people be deported somewhere? As it was also said before the people of DF were born in this country with over 100 children born on Dale farm itself! The usual rubbish about paying way gets pulled out like some party trick...Have you even the slightest evidence, other than stereotypical myth, that they dont pay their way? HAVE YOU? If not why do you say it? If there is any sort of new site in the area this forum will indeed be glowing red, red as in necks![/p][/quote]Oh good grief, please apply some logic to your arguments before applying fingers to keyboards; No - I would not "support" justice if that involved a judge made the council provide a site to replace Dale Farm or pay money to the travellers - why one earth would I or any other right-minded person? I would write to my MP and complain, and use my vote to effect whatever change I could. What I would not do is stage a violent protest and enlist the help of the great unwashed. The majority have not said they don't want to live with black/yellow/red or any other particular type of people. They just want to live with civilised law-abiding people and most Black/yellow/red people are indeed law-abiding civilised people, just as per the majority population. This is not about race, travellers and their supporters keep playing this card in the hope that it will enlist the support of the PC brigade, but it is generally not happening (thank goodness). And no, take a look and I am sure you will see that those opposing the DF travellers on these sites are not now busy visiting other forums to complain about "other ethnic minorities" - what a ridiculous and unfounded claim to make! Oh, and it's no good calling people ed-necks just because they want to live in a fair and civilised society; you demean yourself when you resort to name-calling just as some of those that opposed the DF travellers demean themselves when they resort to the same. Regards, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

3:13am Mon 14 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

Oh good grief, please apply some logic to your arguments before applying fingers to keyboards;
No - I would not "support" justice if that involved a judge made the council provide a site to replace Dale Farm or pay money to the travellers - why one earth would I or any other right-minded person? I would write to my MP and complain, and use my vote to effect whatever change I could. What I would not do is stage a violent protest and enlist the help of the great unwashed.
The majority have not said they don't want to live with black/yellow/red or any other particular type of people. They just want to live with civilised law-abiding people and most Black/yellow/red people are indeed law-abiding civilised people, just as per the majority population. This is not about race, travellers and their supporters keep playing this card in the hope that it will enlist the support of the PC brigade, but it is generally not happening (thank goodness).
And no, take a look and I am sure you will see that those opposing the DF travellers on these sites are not now busy visiting other forums to complain about "other ethnic minorities" - what a ridiculous and unfounded claim to make!
Oh, and it's no good calling people ed-necks just because they want to live in a fair and civilised society; you demean yourself when you resort to name-calling just as some of those that opposed the DF travellers demean themselves when they resort to the same.

Regards,
Smiffy22
Oh good grief, please apply some logic to your arguments before applying fingers to keyboards; No - I would not "support" justice if that involved a judge made the council provide a site to replace Dale Farm or pay money to the travellers - why one earth would I or any other right-minded person? I would write to my MP and complain, and use my vote to effect whatever change I could. What I would not do is stage a violent protest and enlist the help of the great unwashed. The majority have not said they don't want to live with black/yellow/red or any other particular type of people. They just want to live with civilised law-abiding people and most Black/yellow/red people are indeed law-abiding civilised people, just as per the majority population. This is not about race, travellers and their supporters keep playing this card in the hope that it will enlist the support of the PC brigade, but it is generally not happening (thank goodness). And no, take a look and I am sure you will see that those opposing the DF travellers on these sites are not now busy visiting other forums to complain about "other ethnic minorities" - what a ridiculous and unfounded claim to make! Oh, and it's no good calling people ed-necks just because they want to live in a fair and civilised society; you demean yourself when you resort to name-calling just as some of those that opposed the DF travellers demean themselves when they resort to the same. Regards, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

3:22am Mon 14 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

MrsPloppy wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on!

Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing
Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM

Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches.

John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month.

Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation.

A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010.

Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London.

Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten.

He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life.

Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal.

The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14.

Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies.


Read more: http://www.irishexam

iner.com/breakingnew

s/world/former-resid

ents-of-dale-farm-to

-ask-judge-for-suita

ble-rehousing-528024

.html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs
"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense?
Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us!
Would you be able to go on the road living with people of a different culture so easily?

"Gypsies and Travellers face widespread discrimination and prejudice. Even where they do not meet with outright hostility, they often find that people, including service providers, have
very little knowledge of their culture, history and traditions.

Those in bricks-and-mortar housing share all the issues facing the community as a whole, while also having their own particular concerns. Specific issues include difficulty in
settling into mainstream accommodation, stress, isolation, and
worsening health problem"

‘Its like telling settled people, “You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you” – that’s how it feels, living in a house.’

Female English Gypsy, Shelter focus group

http://england.shelt
er.org.uk/__data/***
*
ets/pdf_file/0010/57
772/Working_with_hou
sed_Gypsies_and_Trav
ellers.pdf
What?? you say "‘Its like telling settled people, You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you – that’s how it feels, living in a house."
What kind of crazy statement is this? People (settled people, as you call them) do this all the time, I have friends that do the same. They quite enjoy it (provided their neighbours are civilised).
It's part of living in society. We mix with others and (generally) get on with them. Otherwise, we have to take ourselves off to a remote island or remote cave and cut ourselves off from the rest of civilisation and make our own way.
You can't have it both ways - you cannot reject society that is not identical to you (or closely related) and yet want to have the benefits of that interactive and mixed society. Tell me why you think that would be right? Go on - see if you can actually put it into words!
[quote][p][bold]MrsPloppy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: Just in case the Echo doesnt see fit to post this story ill do it for them, pssst pass it on! Former residents of Dale Farm to ask judge for 'suitable' rehousing Friday, November 11, 2011 - 03:30 PM Travellers made homeless after being evicted from an illegal site in the UK are set to ask senior judges to rule that they have a right to be re-homed in caravans or offered pitches. John Sheridan, Barbara O'Brien and Mary Flynn - who were living on the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex - are scheduled to seek a ruling from the British Court of Appeal in London next month. Their lawyers aim to argue that Basildon Council acted unreasonably in offering only conventional flats or houses as alternative accommodation. A county court judge ruled in favour of the local authority following a hearing in Southend, Essex, in October 2010. Travellers were today given permission to appeal against the county court ruling, following a preliminary appeal court hearing in London. Alex Offer, for the three Travellers, outlined arguments his clients wanted to make, at a hearing before Lord Justice Patten. He said his clients had an "aversion" to living in "bricks and mortar" and would argue that local authorities had an "obligation" to provide "suitable" accommodation which would allow "members of the Gypsy community" to continue their traditional way of life. Lord Justice Patten granted the three Travellers permission to appeal. The court was told that appeal judges were scheduled to hear full arguments from both sides at a hearing in London starting on December 14. Lawyers said afterwards that any appeal court ruling on the issue could affect other Travellers and Gypsies. Read more: http://www.irishexam iner.com/breakingnew s/world/former-resid ents-of-dale-farm-to -ask-judge-for-suita ble-rehousing-528024 .html#ixzz1dPzYbIPs[/p][/quote]"an aversion to living in bricks and mortar" - Wow - you really couldn't make this up! Is there really any intelligent person that would think that this drivel made even the feintest of sense? Think about it. Really think about it. If you still find logic at all in it, please tell us![/p][/quote]Would you be able to go on the road living with people of a different culture so easily? "Gypsies and Travellers face widespread discrimination and prejudice. Even where they do not meet with outright hostility, they often find that people, including service providers, have very little knowledge of their culture, history and traditions. Those in bricks-and-mortar housing share all the issues facing the community as a whole, while also having their own particular concerns. Specific issues include difficulty in settling into mainstream accommodation, stress, isolation, and worsening health problem" ‘Its like telling settled people, “You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you” – that’s how it feels, living in a house.’ Female English Gypsy, Shelter focus group http://england.shelt er.org.uk/__data/*** * ets/pdf_file/0010/57 772/Working_with_hou sed_Gypsies_and_Trav ellers.pdf[/p][/quote]What?? you say "‘Its like telling settled people, You go and get yourselves a caravan, and go off with people that are nothing like you – that’s how it feels, living in a house." What kind of crazy statement is this? People (settled people, as you call them) do this all the time, I have friends that do the same. They quite enjoy it (provided their neighbours are civilised). It's part of living in society. We mix with others and (generally) get on with them. Otherwise, we have to take ourselves off to a remote island or remote cave and cut ourselves off from the rest of civilisation and make our own way. You can't have it both ways - you cannot reject society that is not identical to you (or closely related) and yet want to have the benefits of that interactive and mixed society. Tell me why you think that would be right? Go on - see if you can actually put it into words! smiffy22
  • Score: 0

1:42pm Mon 14 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
Lady milly from Billericay wrote:
Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.
How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts.
What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this.
The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time.
It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.
How can you possibly say the travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have acquired then say anecdotal evidence, which in many ways is stereotypical myth, is allowable when speaking about them? "Ordinary people" Are you suggesting the Travellers are extraordinary? Of course ordinary people do waste time maligning people, it happens all the time.

The fact people through their ignorance, prejudice/bigotry/ra

cism (delete as appropriate) feel/think crime increases doesnt make it fact or indeed excuse the negatively displayed in regards to travellers. racism is still very much in view when it come to the traveller.

The mass media which controls the hearts and minds of the majority of the sheeple in this country gives them the push to display their hate/prejudice that they can no longer display to other ethic minorities. The reason why they cant? Because the establishment and the propaganda arm of that, the mass media, has made it unsociable to do so. Travellers are the scapegoats. Ask yourself this, what other ethnic minority would people be able to verbally attack as they have on these forums without fear of the knock on the door. Can you imagine for instance any such post on Black/Asian ethnic groups? The Traveller is allowed to be discriminated against but only with the permission of the establishment.
Oh crikey, let me explain:
1) By "ordinary people", I meant people that were not racists (the vast majority of non-travellers). It's a shame I have to spell this out, the gist of my posting should have made this fairly obvious.
2) I do not see travellers as an "ethnic minority", and I don't believe many others do so either.
You look for "racial hatred" when there is not (for reasons see above).
Yes, I do say travellers are the only ones to blame for the way people view them. I stand by that statement based on my own familiy's experience and my feeling that, well, ordinary people (see above) just have far too many other things to worry about than to waste time pickicking on people that cause them no trouble - why would they bother (aside from the nutcase racists and a few violent types that will pick on anybody for a bit of entertainment).
Bored with this now.
Tara!
Rgards,
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lady milly from Billericay[/bold] wrote: Crime is committed by people from all walks of life it is a fact. There are no facts to substantiate that crays hill is a hot bed of crime anymore than there is to say Langdon HIlls is. This does not mean to say there is no crime . People with prejudices often become hysterical mixing fact and fiction to perpetuate their own warped views. This is evident on the posts above traveller prejudice continues to exist and the Dale farm saga has enabled these people to have a platform to raise them.[/p][/quote]How can anyone obtain the "facts" on this matter? The government and civil servants will not release the details, I am not saying that this is right or wrong, it's just the way it is and this makes it unfair to tell people thay have to work only to established facts. What people do have though, is their own and their relatives and friends' experiences. Anecdotal evidence perhaps, but is all people have and it is falacious in my view to say they are necessarily unjust in their views simply because of this. The travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have aquired. Ordinary people do not waste so much energy and time fighting against or supporting action against a group without good reason; they really just don't have the time. It seems to me that most people believe that where travellers go, so will an increase in crime and in littering. You, (and even I if I felt so inclined) might not feel this a just view to take, but we must also ask ourselves exactly why it is that so very many of the public feel this way about travellers.[/p][/quote]How can you possibly say the travellers are the only ones to blame for the reputation they have acquired then say anecdotal evidence, which in many ways is stereotypical myth, is allowable when speaking about them? "Ordinary people" Are you suggesting the Travellers are extraordinary? Of course ordinary people do waste time maligning people, it happens all the time. The fact people through their ignorance, prejudice/bigotry/ra cism (delete as appropriate) feel/think crime increases doesnt make it fact or indeed excuse the negatively displayed in regards to travellers. racism is still very much in view when it come to the traveller. The mass media which controls the hearts and minds of the majority of the sheeple in this country gives them the push to display their hate/prejudice that they can no longer display to other ethic minorities. The reason why they cant? Because the establishment and the propaganda arm of that, the mass media, has made it unsociable to do so. Travellers are the scapegoats. Ask yourself this, what other ethnic minority would people be able to verbally attack as they have on these forums without fear of the knock on the door. Can you imagine for instance any such post on Black/Asian ethnic groups? The Traveller is allowed to be discriminated against but only with the permission of the establishment.[/p][/quote]Oh crikey, let me explain: 1) By "ordinary people", I meant people that were not racists (the vast majority of non-travellers). It's a shame I have to spell this out, the gist of my posting should have made this fairly obvious. 2) I do not see travellers as an "ethnic minority", and I don't believe many others do so either. You look for "racial hatred" when there is not (for reasons see above). Yes, I do say travellers are the only ones to blame for the way people view them. I stand by that statement based on my own familiy's experience and my feeling that, well, ordinary people (see above) just have far too many other things to worry about than to waste time pickicking on people that cause them no trouble - why would they bother (aside from the nutcase racists and a few violent types that will pick on anybody for a bit of entertainment). Bored with this now. Tara! Rgards, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Mon 14 Nov 11

OneManOneVoice says...

fearsiuil wrote:
Thank you, Smithy22, for pointing this out again. You reckoned the "criminals" were hiding elsewhere. Wouldn't it have been better to let Tony know this, BEFORE he ordered the 150 plus armed, riot police to break in? ( cost £8million plus). Tony said he was acting on "intelligence received". That's why he changed the council's plan and ordered in the riot police to do what the bailiffs were supposed to do. I think you could have saved the council-tax payers a lot of money, if you'd spoken up before the event and let him know where all these "criminals" you mention are hiding. It used to be an offence to waste police officers time in the old days. Maybe Basildon council have managed to "change" the Law of England yet again. Anyway, Tony, or should I say, Sir Anthony, is still saying that the main reason the council took the steps they did was because of a "planning issue". That's the spiel he's trying to get across to the rest of the country and the rest of the world. A few of the more astute writers on these DF threads, such as Ironman, for instance, have already said that they realise that the planning business was NOT what really lay behind this expensive, wasteful, pointless, debacle. I'm inclined to agree that the heavy-handed action springs more from a desire to appease a powerful lobby which has vested property interests and very strong anti-Irish and anti-traveller feelings. What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne. I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows?
Another username? NightNDay, Mrs Ploppy, icallitspinicallitly
in..now this one
.
You started off on other threads sounding completely different, now you are using an dreverting to your orginal itscalledspin's mannerisms.
.
A good impressionist; you are not.
[quote][p][bold]fearsiuil[/bold] wrote: Thank you, Smithy22, for pointing this out again. You reckoned the "criminals" were hiding elsewhere. Wouldn't it have been better to let Tony know this, BEFORE he ordered the 150 plus armed, riot police to break in? ( cost £8million plus). Tony said he was acting on "intelligence received". That's why he changed the council's plan and ordered in the riot police to do what the bailiffs were supposed to do. I think you could have saved the council-tax payers a lot of money, if you'd spoken up before the event and let him know where all these "criminals" you mention are hiding. It used to be an offence to waste police officers time in the old days. Maybe Basildon council have managed to "change" the Law of England yet again. Anyway, Tony, or should I say, Sir Anthony, is still saying that the main reason the council took the steps they did was because of a "planning issue". That's the spiel he's trying to get across to the rest of the country and the rest of the world. A few of the more astute writers on these DF threads, such as Ironman, for instance, have already said that they realise that the planning business was NOT what really lay behind this expensive, wasteful, pointless, debacle. I'm inclined to agree that the heavy-handed action springs more from a desire to appease a powerful lobby which has vested property interests and very strong anti-Irish and anti-traveller feelings. What we need here is an authority like "Wayne G" back on again. He reckoned he knew a lot of stuff, result of being, among other things, a " benefits officer", a "fraud investigator", a suffering neighbour of anti-social and criminal traveller activity; an expert on planning law and Goodness knows what else. He'd got the jewson lot had our Wayne. I dunno why he vanished so suddenly. Perhaps he's working undercover someplace and will pop up again with a few more gems for us. There again , he may be busy working in the script-writing department of the Beano between covert missions. Who knows?[/p][/quote]Another username? NightNDay, Mrs Ploppy, icallitspinicallitly in..now this one . You started off on other threads sounding completely different, now you are using an dreverting to your orginal itscalledspin's mannerisms. . A good impressionist; you are not. OneManOneVoice
  • Score: 0

7:15pm Wed 16 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

im not any of those names but if it helps you to think there is only one decent person on this forum then fine...

Seems the DF owners are back on the land and Mr, Ill retire, Ball is worried about the safety aspects of the site after he and his marauders left 8ft holes around the land, which people without electricity fell into the dark...The game is a foot and Ball is an arse! lol
How does that strike people? £22,000,000 down the drain to dig up the land. It has been rumoured the Travellers were looking to go into the wholesale veg market but were loath to dig and prepare the land...seems they dont have to now. Who says the council isn't helpful...lol...
im not any of those names but if it helps you to think there is only one decent person on this forum then fine... Seems the DF owners are back on the land and Mr, Ill retire, Ball is worried about the safety aspects of the site after he and his marauders left 8ft holes around the land, which people without electricity fell into the dark...The game is a foot and Ball is an arse! lol How does that strike people? £22,000,000 down the drain to dig up the land. It has been rumoured the Travellers were looking to go into the wholesale veg market but were loath to dig and prepare the land...seems they dont have to now. Who says the council isn't helpful...lol... NightnDay
  • Score: 0

2:11am Sun 20 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Isnt it time the council reviewed the information given to them by Mr Gridley? in regards to his planning applications? If they were flawed is there any room for the council to manoeuvre ?
Isnt it time the council reviewed the information given to them by Mr Gridley? in regards to his planning applications? If they were flawed is there any room for the council to manoeuvre ? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:52pm Sun 20 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG...
lol...
Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column.
Once again, I thank you!
Regards,
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...[/p][/quote]LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG... lol...[/p][/quote]Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column. Once again, I thank you! Regards, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

10:06pm Sun 20 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL
How bizarre! I made no such claim - in fact quite the opposite. Please read posts carefully before commenting.
Not sure on the origin of your comment "smiffy the intelectual", I suspect you say this simply because you are unable to counter the logic or sense in any of the points I make. I detect an increasing not of desperation in your posts, in that you are increasingly resorting to vulgarity and personal insults. And I haven't even read them all (not as much spare time as you, I guess).
Anyway, I certainly do not claim any great intellect, my arguments and reasoning is harder for you to counter simply because I have the facts and reason on my side, rather than any great ability on my part. I have made no extravagant claims, I have hurled no personal abuse, and I suspect that majority of folk reading these columns will appreciate all this. I have made simple points and asked reasonable questions that no-one has bothered to attempt to answer.
Regards,
Smiffy22
nb to anyone following the discussions here, my apologies if do not respond to all that address my posts, I do what I can but I do not have an endless supply of spare time. Have to pay the mortgage some how :-)
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL[/p][/quote]How bizarre! I made no such claim - in fact quite the opposite. Please read posts carefully before commenting. Not sure on the origin of your comment "smiffy the intelectual", I suspect you say this simply because you are unable to counter the logic or sense in any of the points I make. I detect an increasing not of desperation in your posts, in that you are increasingly resorting to vulgarity and personal insults. And I haven't even read them all (not as much spare time as you, I guess). Anyway, I certainly do not claim any great intellect, my arguments and reasoning is harder for you to counter simply because I have the facts and reason on my side, rather than any great ability on my part. I have made no extravagant claims, I have hurled no personal abuse, and I suspect that majority of folk reading these columns will appreciate all this. I have made simple points and asked reasonable questions that no-one has bothered to attempt to answer. Regards, Smiffy22 nb to anyone following the discussions here, my apologies if do not respond to all that address my posts, I do what I can but I do not have an endless supply of spare time. Have to pay the mortgage some how :-) smiffy22
  • Score: 0

12:27am Mon 21 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG...

lol...
Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column.
Once again, I thank you!
Regards,
Smiffy22
You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land!

Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority?

When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable!
Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you?
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...[/p][/quote]LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG... lol...[/p][/quote]Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column. Once again, I thank you! Regards, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land! Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority? When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable! Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you? NightnDay
  • Score: 0

12:35am Mon 21 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL
How bizarre! I made no such claim - in fact quite the opposite. Please read posts carefully before commenting.
Not sure on the origin of your comment "smiffy the intelectual", I suspect you say this simply because you are unable to counter the logic or sense in any of the points I make. I detect an increasing not of desperation in your posts, in that you are increasingly resorting to vulgarity and personal insults. And I haven't even read them all (not as much spare time as you, I guess).
Anyway, I certainly do not claim any great intellect, my arguments and reasoning is harder for you to counter simply because I have the facts and reason on my side, rather than any great ability on my part. I have made no extravagant claims, I have hurled no personal abuse, and I suspect that majority of folk reading these columns will appreciate all this. I have made simple points and asked reasonable questions that no-one has bothered to attempt to answer.
Regards,
Smiffy22
nb to anyone following the discussions here, my apologies if do not respond to all that address my posts, I do what I can but I do not have an endless supply of spare time. Have to pay the mortgage some how :-)
You might as well have made such a comparison, as you stated nudists have as much right as travellers to be considered an ethic minority group...taking about bizarre! Btw can you explain why they could be considered as such?
Have you voiced these opinions to anyone else? Your doctor, consultant, psychiatrist? You posts are full of such rot. Nor are your posts reasonable..but go ahead, list all your question in order and get them answered AFTER you explain why nudists could be given ethnic minority status! In any forum that would be a strange contention!
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: The last post was aimed at smiffy the intellectual, who thinks nudist's and pumpkin growers could be classed as ethnic minorities! LOL[/p][/quote]How bizarre! I made no such claim - in fact quite the opposite. Please read posts carefully before commenting. Not sure on the origin of your comment "smiffy the intelectual", I suspect you say this simply because you are unable to counter the logic or sense in any of the points I make. I detect an increasing not of desperation in your posts, in that you are increasingly resorting to vulgarity and personal insults. And I haven't even read them all (not as much spare time as you, I guess). Anyway, I certainly do not claim any great intellect, my arguments and reasoning is harder for you to counter simply because I have the facts and reason on my side, rather than any great ability on my part. I have made no extravagant claims, I have hurled no personal abuse, and I suspect that majority of folk reading these columns will appreciate all this. I have made simple points and asked reasonable questions that no-one has bothered to attempt to answer. Regards, Smiffy22 nb to anyone following the discussions here, my apologies if do not respond to all that address my posts, I do what I can but I do not have an endless supply of spare time. Have to pay the mortgage some how :-)[/p][/quote]You might as well have made such a comparison, as you stated nudists have as much right as travellers to be considered an ethic minority group...taking about bizarre! Btw can you explain why they could be considered as such? Have you voiced these opinions to anyone else? Your doctor, consultant, psychiatrist? You posts are full of such rot. Nor are your posts reasonable..but go ahead, list all your question in order and get them answered AFTER you explain why nudists could be given ethnic minority status! In any forum that would be a strange contention! NightnDay
  • Score: 0

11:24pm Mon 21 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG...

lol...
Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column.
Once again, I thank you!
Regards,
Smiffy22
You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land!

Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority?

When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable!
Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you?
Hmm, no sure whether I should bother explaining to you yet again, particularly since I do not believe you do not understand, I expect you are just stringing this out even though you know you are in the wrong.
I do not believe it makes any sense to regard travellers as an ethnic group. I do not believe it makes any sense to call nudists an ethnic group. I believe the two points are on a par with each other - I simply use the example of nudists as a means of demonstrating quite how absurd I believe the former to be. Can't put it any simpler for you! It is not a crime to believe this, I have broken no laws, despite how strongly you may disagree with me - we do not yet have laws that specify how we should think! The difference between my position on this subject and the travellers that built on green belt land is that I have not broken any laws, whereas they have. Crikey, I just can't explain this any simpler.
Please bring something productive to the debate - explain why you believe it would be right to consider travellers an ethnic group. I can't imagine you will convince anyone reading these columns, but the joy of debate is in to or more sides putting reasoned arguments for their case, with evidence where possible. We are not seeing a lot of joy here!
Ok, I have responded, even hough I feel this is now just boring the pants of people.
Ah well, here's hoping for more of a challenge, then maybe I'll continue to post.
Regards
Smiffy22
[quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...[/p][/quote]LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG... lol...[/p][/quote]Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column. Once again, I thank you! Regards, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land! Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority? When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable! Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you?[/p][/quote]Hmm, no sure whether I should bother explaining to you yet again, particularly since I do not believe you do not understand, I expect you are just stringing this out even though you know you are in the wrong. I do not believe it makes any sense to regard travellers as an ethnic group. I do not believe it makes any sense to call nudists an ethnic group. I believe the two points are on a par with each other - I simply use the example of nudists as a means of demonstrating quite how absurd I believe the former to be. Can't put it any simpler for you! It is not a crime to believe this, I have broken no laws, despite how strongly you may disagree with me - we do not yet have laws that specify how we should think! The difference between my position on this subject and the travellers that built on green belt land is that I have not broken any laws, whereas they have. Crikey, I just can't explain this any simpler. Please bring something productive to the debate - explain why you believe it would be right to consider travellers an ethnic group. I can't imagine you will convince anyone reading these columns, but the joy of debate is in to or more sides putting reasoned arguments for their case, with evidence where possible. We are not seeing a lot of joy here! Ok, I have responded, even hough I feel this is now just boring the pants of people. Ah well, here's hoping for more of a challenge, then maybe I'll continue to post. Regards Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

11:57pm Tue 22 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
smiffy22 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
jimmyboy1984 wrote:
NightnDay wrote:
I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.
Likewise
can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?
Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya!
Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you!
Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...
LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG...


lol...
Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column.
Once again, I thank you!
Regards,
Smiffy22
You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land!

Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority?

When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable!
Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you?
Hmm, no sure whether I should bother explaining to you yet again, particularly since I do not believe you do not understand, I expect you are just stringing this out even though you know you are in the wrong.
I do not believe it makes any sense to regard travellers as an ethnic group. I do not believe it makes any sense to call nudists an ethnic group. I believe the two points are on a par with each other - I simply use the example of nudists as a means of demonstrating quite how absurd I believe the former to be. Can't put it any simpler for you! It is not a crime to believe this, I have broken no laws, despite how strongly you may disagree with me - we do not yet have laws that specify how we should think! The difference between my position on this subject and the travellers that built on green belt land is that I have not broken any laws, whereas they have. Crikey, I just can't explain this any simpler.
Please bring something productive to the debate - explain why you believe it would be right to consider travellers an ethnic group. I can't imagine you will convince anyone reading these columns, but the joy of debate is in to or more sides putting reasoned arguments for their case, with evidence where possible. We are not seeing a lot of joy here!
Ok, I have responded, even hough I feel this is now just boring the pants of people.
Ah well, here's hoping for more of a challenge, then maybe I'll continue to post.
Regards
Smiffy22
You havent explained why Travellers shouldn't be considered a ethnic minority only that you dont/wouldn't consider them one. Can you explain that? Should Gypsies be considered EM? Should Indians, Pakistanis etc etc.
Cab you explain this as i have asked you to do for at least 4 posts.
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jimmyboy1984[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NightnDay[/bold] wrote: I thought, so idle gossip at best, racist rumour at worse...you decide why you passed it on.[/p][/quote]Likewise[/p][/quote]can you explain how my comment could be defined as "racist rumour" ?[/p][/quote]Certainly.....once you've had the courtesy to explain why my statement can be defined as 'racist rumour'......go on dare ya![/p][/quote]Well first of all its a rumour (im being kind here in calling it that) and not a evidenced fact and as such, its been presented to suggest a whole community is more criminal than any other, the fact the community in question are a ethnic minority community implies the rumour is of a racial nature. which it obviously is. Now you![/p][/quote]Travellers an "ethnic minority"? Not in my book! No more than it is right to call, for example, nudists an ethnic minority. They are just a group of people from Ireland than decide to live in a caravan and, erm, travel around. Except some seem to want to stay in one place...[/p][/quote]LOL you complete goon, do you think the law of the land cares if you dont agree with who they designate ethnic minorities? FFS... lol....you really are a moron. Your post really needs reading to show just what a buffoon you are lol...It is so wrong in so many levels that to actually try to prise any sort of coherent meaning out of it would be impossible...please stop making a fool of yourself...have some sort of pride...lol...OMG... lol...[/p][/quote]Marvelous! Thank you so much, NighttnDay, you could not have made a better affirmation of my (and other anti-traveller posters') position on these matters. I take heart from your inadvertent admission of complete failure to put up an argument in these discussions, and in the fact that your reversion to crude insult and gibberish will be seen as such by all (with any sense) that read this column. Once again, I thank you! Regards, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]You state travellers are not an ethnic minority "in your book" Which of course means you are ready to ignore the laws of the land that says they are..Then you complain the Travellers ignore the laws of the land! Now lets look at why the two laws are ignored. The travellers want to keep their homes on land they have bought..Thats why they ignored planning acts..Now why do you want to ignore the law of the land that says these people are an Ethic minority? When you have given your reason for ignoring the law when can then measure it against why they want to and see which is more reasonable! Would you like to respond or is it getting to near to the crux of the matter for you?[/p][/quote]Hmm, no sure whether I should bother explaining to you yet again, particularly since I do not believe you do not understand, I expect you are just stringing this out even though you know you are in the wrong. I do not believe it makes any sense to regard travellers as an ethnic group. I do not believe it makes any sense to call nudists an ethnic group. I believe the two points are on a par with each other - I simply use the example of nudists as a means of demonstrating quite how absurd I believe the former to be. Can't put it any simpler for you! It is not a crime to believe this, I have broken no laws, despite how strongly you may disagree with me - we do not yet have laws that specify how we should think! The difference between my position on this subject and the travellers that built on green belt land is that I have not broken any laws, whereas they have. Crikey, I just can't explain this any simpler. Please bring something productive to the debate - explain why you believe it would be right to consider travellers an ethnic group. I can't imagine you will convince anyone reading these columns, but the joy of debate is in to or more sides putting reasoned arguments for their case, with evidence where possible. We are not seeing a lot of joy here! Ok, I have responded, even hough I feel this is now just boring the pants of people. Ah well, here's hoping for more of a challenge, then maybe I'll continue to post. Regards Smiffy22[/p][/quote]You havent explained why Travellers shouldn't be considered a ethnic minority only that you dont/wouldn't consider them one. Can you explain that? Should Gypsies be considered EM? Should Indians, Pakistanis etc etc. Cab you explain this as i have asked you to do for at least 4 posts. NightnDay
  • Score: 0

1:11am Wed 23 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious.
Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good!
As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles.
As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time!
Best wishes,
Smiffy22
Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious. Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good! As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles. As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time! Best wishes, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

1:12am Wed 23 Nov 11

smiffy22 says...

Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious.
Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good!
As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles.
As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time!
Best wishes,
Smiffy22
Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious. Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good! As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles. As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time! Best wishes, Smiffy22 smiffy22
  • Score: 0

5:32pm Wed 23 Nov 11

NightnDay says...

Well, logically, it is for you to explain why you think the experts who advised the Pavee should be considered an ethnic minority have made an error? You do think they have made an error dont you? So can you enlighten us in what way they have made an error!
But hold!
You do know why you dont consider them not to be an ethnic minority dont you? Surely you do! It couldn't be that you dont know why you think this could it? That would be just silly wouldn't it

YOU: The earth isn't round

ME: Oh really why not, experts in the matter say it is, so why isn't it?

YOU: I dont have to tell you but it isn't, now you tell me why it is round, im going to ignore the experts!

You have talked yourself into a corner, you stated they wasn't a ethic minority and now YOU DONT THINK they are an ethnic minority while ignoring the fact they ARE A ETHNIC MINORITY and recognised and legislated for by the establishment as such..lol...what a nit.

Now your going to slink off, shamed faced, having not answered why they are not an ethnic minority. You have made a fool of yourself
Admit it, you stated they wasn't an ethnic minority before you checked and now you are not even back peddling but walking sideways while blaming all around you for not understand you. lol

Ummmmmm Yes! "done some good" well you did well to avoid the question that you seemed to pin all your creditability on and which has shot you in the foot. You see even as we posts, The Traveller is recognised in this country as...do i need to say it? LMAO




BTW Are Africans and Indians ethnic minorities in this country? If yes why? If no why?


Silly silly person
Well, logically, it is for you to explain why you think the experts who advised the Pavee should be considered an ethnic minority have made an error? You do think they have made an error dont you? So can you enlighten us in what way they have made an error! But hold! You do know why you dont consider them not to be an ethnic minority dont you? Surely you do! It couldn't be that you dont know why you think this could it? That would be just silly wouldn't it YOU: The earth isn't round ME: Oh really why not, experts in the matter say it is, so why isn't it? YOU: I dont have to tell you but it isn't, now you tell me why it is round, im going to ignore the experts! You have talked yourself into a corner, you stated they wasn't a ethic minority and now YOU DONT THINK they are an ethnic minority while ignoring the fact they ARE A ETHNIC MINORITY and recognised and legislated for by the establishment as such..lol...what a nit. Now your going to slink off, shamed faced, having not answered why they are not an ethnic minority. You have made a fool of yourself Admit it, you stated they wasn't an ethnic minority before you checked and now you are not even back peddling but walking sideways while blaming all around you for not understand you. lol Ummmmmm Yes! "done some good" well you did well to avoid the question that you seemed to pin all your creditability on and which has shot you in the foot. You see even as we posts, The Traveller is recognised in this country as...do i need to say it? LMAO BTW Are Africans and Indians ethnic minorities in this country? If yes why? If no why? Silly silly person NightnDay
  • Score: 0

9:00am Sat 26 Nov 11

may ray says...

smiffy22 wrote:
Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious. Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good! As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles. As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time! Best wishes, Smiffy22
It does not matter what you think, they are a recognised ethnic minority, fact
[quote][p][bold]smiffy22[/bold] wrote: Oh good grief! It is not for me to explain why I do not believe travellers should be considered an ethnic group, it is for you to explain why you believe that they are so. I should not have to explain the logic here, but it is generally not for someone to explain why something does not exist, it is for the believer to explain their categorisation or their belief. Travellers are just a collection of people. Mostly Irish (here at least), and mostly liking to live in a caravan. Many other groups of people make lifestyle choices but I would not automatically consider them an ethnic group. The nudists were just a convenient example. A group of people with a very distinctive lifestyle choice. Like most people, I regard ethnicity as being more to do with being of a particular race. A group of travellers from Somalia may qualify as an ethnic group, but not because they are travellers. A group of travellers from Birmingham would not in my view qualify as being an ethnic group. Oh crikey why am I bothering to spell out the obvious. Other readers will think me daft for bothering to explain this in minute detail, not sure why I did but it must be more for a wider audience rather than the few respondents here I guess. People find these pages by searching, so I always feel a bit of an obligation to counter the pro-traveller comments in case people do not consider the full facts. I hope I have done some good! As for my previous questions that travellers have ignored, look them up, though they are spread across a number of articles. As I said before, I will refrain from further comment unless some new points are raised (rather than the endless loop we seem to have at present). I have done my bit. I will try harder to resist this time! Best wishes, Smiffy22[/p][/quote]It does not matter what you think, they are a recognised ethnic minority, fact may ray
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree