That could be an explanation why you come up with nothing.
Since you need help I'll give you a tip,
the words are usually arranged in lines,
not between them
As someone attempting to be amusing is wont to remark
I live to give
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Since you need help I'll give you a tip,
the words are usually arranged in lines,
not between them
As someone attempting to be amusing is wont to remark
I live to give
It did seem a shame to let it go unremarked after the effort you put in.
If it was out, you lost the point.On average 52% of the line calls are out with 48% in...…..They have decided to ignore this and count them all as in.
Clearly it hasn't with you!
"We can take the hit"
Sounds like the last words of the Mayor of Pompeii as the pyroplastic flow loomed over the town
Just what collection of random wishful thinking has caused you to willingly fall headlong into the path of that so obvious a disaster?
You would do better to tear the stuff you've been reading into handy 7" by 5" squares and wipe your backside with it
(Believe it or not there was a British Standard size for torn newspaper when used as toilet paper)
I like fingers, his ideas smack of a Brian Rix Farce
Was it based on Broadsheet, Berliner or Tabloid?
(Not for one moment suggesting that use of newsprint for arse wiping is in any way related to "class" and income and which newspapers are read. No, of course not.)
Originally on Broadsheet where the test was to be conducted with a 13 litre flush
10 sheets to be used for three flushes and one sheet remaining from the total of thirty sheets flushed constituted a failure.
When tabloids came in flush volumes had fallen to ll litres and the failure level moved to a pass if one sheet was left out of the thirty flushed
By the time 9 litres became the standard the test was dropped, you were lucky if you could get half the sheets to flush.
So then a version of the test using first Izal medicated toilet paper set the ball rolling again.
And lo it came to pass the flush volume went down to six litres and soft toilet tissue was used in the tests and of course they are much smaller and easier to flush
Then down went the flush volume to 4.5 litres
I think you can guess what happened!
Flush valves thankfully became legal
And in any case Building sites became deluxe places that didn't use Newspaper in the same way!
During the years of reducing flush volumes we had to do a a lot o research on what appears at first glance a very simple water displacement in the pan, and removal of solids, which it most assuredly is not.
However after Brexit there will be a new productivity incentive and the introduction of this revolutionary product
Guaranteed to give a flush to the cheeks!
Alongside that, the introduction of colour printing changed the paper to something very different - much harder.Originally on Broadsheet where the test was to be conducted with a 13 litre flush
10 sheets to be used for three flushes and one sheet remaining from the total of thirty sheets flushed constituted a failure.
When tabloids came in flush volumes had fallen to ll litres and the failure level moved to a pass if one sheet was left out of the thirty flushed
By the time 9 litres became the standard the test was dropped, you were lucky if you could get half the sheets to flush.
So then a version of the test using first Izal medicated toilet paper set the ball rolling again.
And lo it came to pass the flush volume went down to six litres and soft toilet tissue was used in the tests and of course they are much smaller and easier to flush
Then down went the flush volume to 4.5 litres
I think you can guess what happened!
Flush valves thankfully became legal
And in any case Building sites became deluxe places that didn't use Newspaper in the same way!
During the years of reducing flush volumes we had to do a a lot o research on what appears at first glance a very simple water displacement in the pan, and removal of solids, which it most assuredly is not.
However after Brexit there will be a new productivity incentive and the introduction of this revolutionary product
Guaranteed to give a flush to the cheeks!
Correct, after all, it was Tory stupidity that brought us Brexit
In the Telegraph
"
No, Boris and Brexit have nothing in common with that ignoramus Donald Trump
Janet Daley
There are none so blind as they that will not see.
"
No, Boris and Brexit have nothing in common with that ignoramus Donald Trump
Janet Daley
There are none so blind as they that will not see.
In the Express
"
Disaster for Brexit? US issues stark threat that could torpedo trade deal with Britain
DONALD TRUMP’s administration have signalled a potential trans Atlantic post Brexit trade deal may depend on whether the next British Prime Minister is willing to fall in line with the US policy on Huawei.
So much for leaving the EU to "Take back control"
"
Disaster for Brexit? US issues stark threat that could torpedo trade deal with Britain
DONALD TRUMP’s administration have signalled a potential trans Atlantic post Brexit trade deal may depend on whether the next British Prime Minister is willing to fall in line with the US policy on Huawei.
So much for leaving the EU to "Take back control"
I see the Mail on Sunday have been supported by both Tory idiot candidates and Hunt was defending the right of the press to
"Publish leaks when they are in the Public interest."
Can anyone explain how causing a rift between the Government of the day and causing the the destruction of the career of our Ambassador to the USA is "in the public interest"?
And now they have gone even further with more leaks?
This is a Politically motivated leak, not the press working in the "Public Interest" it is sabotage
"Publish leaks when they are in the Public interest."
Can anyone explain how causing a rift between the Government of the day and causing the the destruction of the career of our Ambassador to the USA is "in the public interest"?
And now they have gone even further with more leaks?
This is a Politically motivated leak, not the press working in the "Public Interest" it is sabotage
You are right, I think an Ambassador should expect total confidentiality when communicating with the government of the day. They should not have the need to consider the question, "what if this got out?" That expectation of trust and confidentiality is an essential element of the job, without it, they may as well pack up.
Hunt and Johnson are a pair of mongs. They will say and do anything which they think will enhance their chances of becoming PM. I hate them
Here is what should a scandal but will quietly drift away of course
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-leak-scandal-engulfs-brexit-party-2w7dn3hrm
pure co-incidence naturally
and here's another one co-incidentally
It must be the season for them!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-leak-scandal-engulfs-brexit-party-2w7dn3hrm
pure co-incidence naturally
and here's another one co-incidentally
It must be the season for them!
I agree.
Of course, once truly available being discussed in public, there is little reason to shout "Official Secrets Act" but, even then, some circumstances could mean that extra information is disclosed by the press. Such as might be evident from scans of original documents when everyone else is just quoting the words.
I suspect I am hoping that the next bit of definite information is the name of the leaker. Followed by the CPS launching OSA charges. (My inbuilt sense of hypocrisy might just affect quite how much I welcome that depending on the person and circumstances. But I can't think of a good motivation.)
.. funny how you ignore the 15.8 million who voted against