On 25/05/2020 09:21, wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2020 11:33:54 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/05/2020 09:54, wrote:


Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the current
one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting down
any union that proposes it.


Wouldn't that risk turning into more of a politician with one bollock
approach?

I don't follow.


Hitler has only got one ball
Goerings are rather small
Himmler's are rather sim'lar
And Goebbels has no balls at all.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

wrote in message ...
On Sat, 23 May 2020 11:33:54 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/05/2020 09:54, wrote:


Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the
current
one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting
down
any union that proposes it.


Wouldn't that risk turning into more of a politician with one bollock
approach?

I don't follow.

all together now!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx96NLBAahk

On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:26:27 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 25/05/2020 09:21, wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2020 11:33:54 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/05/2020 09:54, wrote:


Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the current

one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting down

any union that proposes it.


Wouldn't that risk turning into more of a politician with one bollock
approach?

I don't follow.


Hitler has only got one ball
Goerings are rather small
Himmler's are rather sim'lar
And Goebbels has no balls at all.

Another one for Godwin then.

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 25/05/2020 09:21, wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2020 11:33:54 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/05/2020 09:54, wrote:


Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the
current
one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting
down
any union that proposes it.


Wouldn't that risk turning into more of a politician with one bollock
approach?

I don't follow.


Hitler has only got one ball
Goerings are rather small
Himmler's are rather sim'lar
And Goebbels has no balls at all.

damn, you replied whilst I was looking for a suitable link

I think my reply was better though

tim



--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 25/05/2020 13:16, tim... wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 25/05/2020 09:21, wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2020 11:33:54 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 23/05/2020 09:54, wrote:


Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the
current
one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the
unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and
shutting down
any union that proposes it.


Wouldn't that risk turning into more of a politician with one bollock
approach?

I don't follow.


Hitler has only got one ball
Goerings are rather small
Himmler's are rather sim'lar
And Goebbels has no balls at all.

damn, you replied whilst I was looking for a suitable link

I think my reply was better though


pokes tongue out


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 08:54:32AM +0000, wrote:

Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the current one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting down
any union that proposes it.

That would never get through parliament. There are a lot of Tory MPs who
are decent human beings and not caricatures. And then there's the Lords.

--
David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing

Irregular English:
ladies glow; gentlemen perspire; brutes, oafs and athletes sweat

On Wed, 27 May 2020 13:42:24 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 08:54:32AM +0000, wrote:

Any government with a working pair of ******** (which rules out the current
one)
could enact emergency legislation at a time like this to put the unions
back in their box by making striking illegal for X months and shutting down
any union that proposes it.

That would never get through parliament. There are a lot of Tory MPs who
are decent human beings and not caricatures. And then there's the Lords.

I'm sure 3 months ago people would have said the exact same thing about putting
the entire country under effective house arrest. Believe me, it would get
through and the lords are irrelevant anyway as any legislation can eventually
be forced through. All the lords do is delay it.

In article , Basil Jet
writes
It is obvious that wearing a mask makes the
wearer safer.. it would defy the laws of physics if it didn't,

Rubbish.

Assuming it's the typical mask that the public buys, the virus sticks to
the outside of the mask and then has time to migrate in. But it doesn't
fly off after it's migrated out. Which is why it protects others but not
you.

(My source is a senior researcher on influenza and Covid-19 at the CDC
in Atlanta. I'll believe him any day.)

--
Clive D.W. Feather

Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
In article , Basil Jet
writes
It is obvious that wearing a mask makes the
wearer safer.. it would defy the laws of physics if it didn't,

Rubbish.

Assuming it's the typical mask that the public buys, the virus sticks to
the outside of the mask and then has time to migrate in. But it doesn't
fly off after it's migrated out. Which is why it protects others but not
you.

(My source is a senior researcher on influenza and Covid-19 at the CDC
in Atlanta. I'll believe him any day.)


Yes, that makes sense. I think cheap masks also don't fit well enough to
protect the wearer.

On 28/05/2020 21:37, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
In article , Basil Jet
writes
It is obvious that wearing a mask makes the
wearer safer.. it would defy the laws of physics if it didn't,

Rubbish.

Assuming it's the typical mask that the public buys, the virus sticks to
the outside of the mask and then has time to migrate in. But it doesn't
fly off after it's migrated out. Which is why it protects others but not
you.

(My source is a senior researcher on influenza and Covid-19 at the CDC
in Atlanta. I'll believe him any day.)


Do you really believe that a single virus landing on the outside of a
mask has a 100% chance of migrating in and infecting the wearer, so
there is 0% chance that the mask could save the wearer?

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Blue Aeroplanes - Fruit (Live 1983-1995)