BTW (& fpt).r Llama, I think we might have been at the same Jethro Tull concert in Southampton! One of Mrs J's favourite bands.
Well, dang, Mr. J.! What a shame we didn't find each other. If we had Mrs. J could have been bored witless when you two joined the H&DGTA for supper and we talked about railways, flying and Victorian engineering (the Associations three favourite, non-political, topics).
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
The plumber and pizza boy narrative don't really exist anymore.
You can get longer content other than short-extracts, but they are usually from sites you have to sign up to/pay for. It seems that porn from these pay sites (which can range from 5 minutes to an hour or so) are being uploaded onto the 'free' sites. Narratives do exist - see cuckold porn, nannies, incest etc. That said I think the biggest change in porn (having seen some 'old' porn) is the increase in the aggressive nature towards women.
That's just not true, on pretty much any level. Sites like Motherless provide long form free porn and there is plenty of long form free availability even on semi-pay sites like xhamster. And as I said earlier, the semi-amateur live shows like Chaturbate replace scenario porn anyway.
Scenario porn has always been mysogynistic, that's not changed. Outside of that, the problem now is that porn is increasingly controlled by the female performer and there is a strong feminist ideology which does not allow any form of female sexual expression which does not fit within their own agenda - so no BDSM, no rape fantasy, no DD/LG, etc. And all three of those are very, very common female paraphilias (in fact none of them would even qualify as paraphilias given how commonplace they are).
What? I'm not denying that there isn't any free long porn on sites, just that they come from pay-sites, and are uploaded onto free-sites.
I don't see any evidence that feminist thought is seriously influencing commercial porn - there appears to be a large amount of BDSM from sites like Kink.
I've also never seen evidence rape fantasy is common - 25%-40% of women is a minority, not a majority, especially if the figure lies at the lower-end of the scale. It also depends on the terminology used. I guess that far more women have the fantasy of being 'taken' - as opposed to actually being raped. E.g.
Sixty-two percent said they'd had at least one such fantasy. But responses varied depending on the terminology used. When asked about being "overpowered by a man," 52 percent said they'd had that fantasy, the situation most typically depicted in women's romance fiction. But when the term was "rape," only 32 percent said they'd had the fantasy. These findings are in the same ballpark as previous reports.
As for BDSM, I don't think most feminists have an issue with BDSM - BDSM puts a lot of importance on the issue of consent, and sites like Kink in particular emphasize that. Also men are not exclusively doms - women can be too. It's more the influence of aggressive manner in 'vanilla porn' that's an issue.
As for BDSM - while a bit of spanking, tied up etc may be common a lot more of the hardcore stuff that I've seen (that I won't go into on here, because I don't know if it's appropriate) I doubt is common.
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
And here is the core problem if ever you try to discuss human sexuality.
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
Labour leadership contender Liz Kendall has conceded that leftwinger Jeremy Corbyn is now “clearly ahead” in the race to succeed Ed Miliband because party supporters are so “desperate” for a radical change of direction for the party.
But amid rising concern that Labour is heading for a historic split, Kendall, seen as the centre-right candidate, warns that if Corbyn is elected the party will have no chance of winning an election and could slump to a worse defeat than it suffered under Ed Miliband in May.
Incidentally, Mr. Llama, what breed of hound are you set to acquire?
A fair question, Mr. D., for preference something on the Beagle line would do very well. However to be fair on the hound and our neighbours to say nothing of our sanity I would need to find the right breeder. That said, HD2, much missed from this site, reminds me that pet dogs should be obtained from Rescue Centres and he has a very good point. So it will probably be something beagle(ish) size or, more likely, the mutt that Herself falls in love with.
Incidentally, Mr. Llama, what breed of hound are you set to acquire?
A fair question, Mr. D., for preference something on the Beagle line would do very well. However to be fair on the hound and our neighbours to say nothing of our sanity I would need to find the right breeder. That said, HD2, much missed from this site, reminds me that pet dogs should be obtained from Rescue Centres and he has a very good point. So it will probably be something beagle(ish) size or, more likely, the mutt that Herself falls in love with.
I can't recommend wire-haired fox terriers highly enough. Whip-smart, the bark of a big dog in a medium dog's frame, brilliant with kids - plus, for those who don't want to be hoovering all day - they don't shed. They just get fluffier and fluffier....
It does look a spiffing dog, Mr. Mark, and in the right size range. However, a fox-terrier? Jerome K Jerome in Three Men in a Boat described the breed as having naturally three times the original sin of any other (Montmorency, you'll no doubt recall, was a fox-terrier).
Pfft. This is the breeder where we got Archie from. He is a senior Crufts judge and breeds the most wonderful dogs, whether you want a show dog, to have puppies - or just a pet.
And there was me thinking the Labour party election rules are complicated. What the hell is BDSM, or DD/LG, or even paraphilias. In fact, I think I'd rather not know to be honest.
Asked my wife what a MILF was the other week because a friend had used the word en passing, like I should have known. She didn't know either so we googled it- my computer went into overdrive.
The plumber and pizza boy narrative don't really exist anymore.
You can get longer content other than short-extracts, but they are usually from sites you have to sign up to/pay for. It seems that porn from these pay sites (which can range from 5 minutes to an hour or so) are being uploaded onto the 'free' sites. Narratives do exist - see cuckold porn, nannies, incest etc. That said I think the biggest change in porn (having seen some 'old' porn) is the increase in the aggressive nature towards women.
That's just not true, on pretty much any level. Sites like Motherless provide long form free porn and there is plenty of long form free availability even on semi-pay sites like xhamster. And as I said earlier, the semi-amateur live shows like Chaturbate replace scenario porn anyway.
Scenario porn has always been mysogynistic, that's not changed. Outside of that, the problem now is that porn is increasingly controlled by the female performer and there is a strong feminist ideology which does not allow any form of female sexual expression which does not fit within their own agenda - so no BDSM, no rape fantasy, no DD/LG, etc. And all three of those are very, very common female paraphilias (in fact none of them would even qualify as paraphilias given how commonplace they are).
Incidentally, Mr. Llama, what breed of hound are you set to acquire?
A fair question, Mr. D., for preference something on the Beagle line would do very well. However to be fair on the hound and our neighbours to say nothing of our sanity I would need to find the right breeder. That said, HD2, much missed from this site, reminds me that pet dogs should be obtained from Rescue Centres and he has a very good point. So it will probably be something beagle(ish) size or, more likely, the mutt that Herself falls in love with.
Incidentally, Mr. Llama, what breed of hound are you set to acquire?
A fair question, Mr. D., for preference something on the Beagle line would do very well. However to be fair on the hound and our neighbours to say nothing of our sanity I would need to find the right breeder. That said, HD2, much missed from this site, reminds me that pet dogs should be obtained from Rescue Centres and he has a very good point. So it will probably be something beagle(ish) size or, more likely, the mutt that Herself falls in love with.
I can't recommend wire-haired fox terriers highly enough. Whip-smart, the bark of a big dog in a medium dog's frame, brilliant with kids - plus, for those who don't want to be hoovering all day - they don't shed. They just get fluffier and fluffier....
I was a fan of the mini schnauzer, but they are now so popular they are being mass bred which leads to genetic issues, so following the recent loss of boo, got a three quarter shnauzer quarter Yorkshire terrier, which has all the attributes of the mini, but eliminates the genetic problems. An excellent mix in my opinion.
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
I think what it really comes down to is that Corbyn will be a bold opposition. And bold oppositions are dangerous, even if misguided.
Apparently when they went through Pete Townsends computer there was absolutely no sign that he had looked at kiddie porn. Like many thousands of people, Pete Townsend took a caution for something he didn't do rather than go through the humiliation (or for many others the expense or anxiety) of a court hearing.
Why he came up with that lame excuse god only knows? But I guess he was under a bit of stress at the time.
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
Every Labour supporter who thinks Corbyn has a chance of winning a general election is clearly oblivious of the type of constituencies needed to win an overall majority: places like Bedford, Swindon, Cannock, Worcester, Gloucester, Watford.
Apparently when they went through Pete Townsends computer there was absolutely no sign that he had looked at kiddie porn. Like many thousands of people, Pete Townsend took a caution for something he didn't do rather than go through the humiliation (or for many others the expense or anxiety) of a court hearing.
Why he came up with that lame excuse god only knows? But I guess he was under a bit of stress at the time.
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
I'm interested Tyson. Does Townsend himself now deny ever having the images? Is that someone saying that on his behalf?
Is that the GSK one? I know a guy called Peter Piot reasonably well, who is the adviser to the WHO on ebola, so have some idea of what's going on. But there are literally hundreds of projects underway (all those small biotechs who needed free government money suddenly discovered that their projects might have potential for ebola...) so I don't keep track of them all!
Until this evening, they were both fine HurstLlama. But Jasper lll has just come in with a very nasty eye injury after running into the local feline bully just outside our garden. Just trying to weigh up if an emergency trip to vet tonight or a visit to their weekend surgery tomorrow morning is the best idea. Holly the dog remains very jealous of the cats, but not complaining about the fact that she is getting spoilt and the dog treats have increased since their arrival. As for the two kitties, unfortunately they are already extremely good hunters, and its been carnage in both the garden and house this summer. Little Caitlan ran past me into the house with a rabbit recently which caused me to do something I never normally do, scream! It took a good few minutes for fitaloon and our youngest lad to catch her and get rid of it (shudders)!
How are the kittens getting on? I saw that first picture of two balls of fur but nothing since.
I don't know that we will go the full cat and dog route. The dog can certainly only happen after Thomas the Rescue has gone through the final cat flap (which, alas, I don't think will be too long). Could I really cope with two new kittens and a pup? Dunno and I am not sure I would want to find out.
Is that the GSK one? I know a guy called Peter Piot reasonably well, who is the adviser to the WHO on ebola, so have some idea of what's going on. But there are literally hundreds of projects underway (all those small biotechs who needed free government money suddenly discovered that their projects might have potential for ebola...) so I don't keep track of them all!
I was googling Townshend and Co after their spectacular Glasto show- and saw references to the kiddie porn thing he was cautioned for. Apparently nothing was found on his computer. You might see it on Wikipedia.
It didn't surprise me though- many people take cautions; it's the oldest police trick on the book (that and TIC's) for clearing up crimes without getting any evidence.
Apparently when they went through Pete Townsends computer there was absolutely no sign that he had looked at kiddie porn. Like many thousands of people, Pete Townsend took a caution for something he didn't do rather than go through the humiliation (or for many others the expense or anxiety) of a court hearing.
Why he came up with that lame excuse god only knows? But I guess he was under a bit of stress at the time.
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
I'm interested Tyson. Does Townsend himself now deny ever having the images? Is that someone saying that on his behalf?
Good evening everyone, From following the threads today, I have finessed my voting position. 1. Kendall 2. Cooper 3. Corbyn 4. Burnham From a betting standpoint Cooper is my preferred outcome.
Until this evening, they were both fine HurstLlama. But Jasper lll has just come in with a very nasty eye injury after running into the local feline bully just outside our garden. Just trying to weigh up if an emergency trip to vet tonight or a visit to their weekend surgery tomorrow morning is the best idea. Holly the dog remains very jealous of the cats, but not complaining about the fact that she is getting spoilt and the dog treats have increased since their arrival. As for the two kitties, unfortunately they are already extremely good hunters, and its been carnage in both the garden and house this summer. Little Caitlan ran past me into the house with a rabbit recently which caused me to do something I never normally do, scream! It took a good few minutes for fitaloon and our youngest lad to catch her and get rid of it (shudders)!
How are the kittens getting on? I saw that first picture of two balls of fur but nothing since.
I don't know that we will go the full cat and dog route. The dog can certainly only happen after Thomas the Rescue has gone through the final cat flap (which, alas, I don't think will be too long). Could I really cope with two new kittens and a pup? Dunno and I am not sure I would want to find out.
The joys of having young cats! If they are not hunting they are thieving. Esther, one of or our old team (RIP) once turned up in our kitchen one summer Sunday with half a leg of lamb, nicely roasted with rosemary and garlic - came from next door who had left it unattended on the work-surface to rest before carving but who also left their kitchen door open. The thing was nearly as big as the cat and we never did work out how she got it through the cat flap.
As for Jasper if that was us we would be straight off to the vet with him, but we are soft and don't think straight when our animals are involved.
Only 11 days remaining to pay £3 and get your votes in Labour's elections (for Leader, Deputy and if in London - Mayor too)... truly a bargain, for whatever reason you'll use your vote for!
I love the idea of Corbyn-Watson in charge of t'Labour party so it's a simple vote for those two and that's it. Labour will probably do quite well with them two in charge in London, Wales and Scotland in 2016... and goodness knows what will happen if/when Corbyn stands down as promised in 2018: if the Left win again it'll split the party... if the Right regain the party, it'll split...
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
I think what it really comes down to is that Corbyn will be a bold opposition. And bold oppositions are dangerous, even if misguided.
Indeed, I think the scary thing about Corbyn is that he will be prepared to come up with a populist list of policies, his objectives being 2 fold - to attract support and to windup the MSM to start demonizing him - which will likely further increase his support.
Just spent a happy 2 hours watching my third favourite film of all time - Mama Mia.I defy anyone not to feel happy after that. And my 1 and 2? Second is 'She wore a yellow ribbon' and 1st is Top Hat. Not only the best songs and dances but a brilliant script and a fantastic supporting cast.
I was googling Townshend and Co after their spectacular Glasto show- and saw references to the kiddie porn thing he was cautioned for. Apparently nothing was found on his computer. You might see it on Wikipedia.
It didn't surprise me though- many people take cautions; it's the oldest police trick on the book (that and TIC's) for clearing up crimes without getting any evidence.
Apparently when they went through Pete Townsends computer there was absolutely no sign that he had looked at kiddie porn. Like many thousands of people, Pete
I prefer to study the market forces of non-traditional markets, like porn, drugs, and illegal weapons.
The_Apocalypse and Dair are right (although Dair, I don't think our points were the same).
The largest sites by number of hits are still YouTube-style clip sites.
There are still pay-per-view sites, catering to an older and wealthier market; frequently those with more specific interests.
The sort of camsites Dair talks about are the new entrants, and a significant part of the market (only recently would it have been appropriate to have seen them as part of the ass market). The vast majority of them are solo performers so I'm not sure it really matches TA's argument that modern porn is more aggressive, although it is clear that the YouTube-style site caries more hardcore pornography accessible to the teenager than the top shelf ever did.
Yeah, right, we believe you.
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
I'm interested Tyson. Does Townsend himself now deny ever having the images? Is that someone saying that on his behalf?
Defo sounds like a fit up by plod. From his Wikipedia page.
"Besides his arrest for assaulting a police officer in 1967 and issues with destruction of property, Townshend was cautioned by British police as part of Operation Ore, a major investigation on child pornography conducted in 2002–2003. Townshend was placed on the sex offenders register for five years in 2003 after admitting he had used his credit card to access a website bearing the message "click here for child porn" four years earlier.[105][106] Later investigation showed that he had visited an ordinary porn site, and not one containing child porn.[107]"
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
What a complete load of twaddle. The only bit I agree with is "Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s" and the political choice would be that of the 1980s - a somewhat pragmatic Tory party or a Labour party with policies so barking mad that nobody votes for them.
Alistair Heath was at primary school in the 1980s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allister_Heath - so I doubt he recalls what it was like. Maggie was not actually very popular but yet she kept winning because of Michael Foot and the left-wing firebrands of the time.
The Tories did not win, apart from the Falklands boost. They won because Labour was such a mess that there was no one else to vote for.
The lesson of the 80s/90s was - Vote Loony Left, Get Tories.
Is that the GSK one? I know a guy called Peter Piot reasonably well, who is the adviser to the WHO on ebola, so have some idea of what's going on. But there are literally hundreds of projects underway (all those small biotechs who needed free government money suddenly discovered that their projects might have potential for ebola...) so I don't keep track of them all!
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
I think what it really comes down to is that Corbyn will be a bold opposition. And bold oppositions are dangerous, even if misguided.
Indeed, I think the scary thing about Corbyn is that he will be prepared to come up with a populist list of policies, his objectives being 2 fold - to attract support and to windup the MSM to start demonizing him - which will likely further increase his support.
Hmmm... yes. I have been a victim of this sort of behaviour, except I stamped down on it. I signed a monthly direct debit for a very well known cancer charity and within a month they wanted to sign me up for other fundraising they did. The increase was nearly 500%. I said no and threatened to cancel my direct debit. They then asked if they could please up the direct debit by just £1. I figured £1 per month was not savage so I said yes. They upped it by £1 per WEEK.
I admit that £4 per month was not going to kill me but the sheer dishonesty of it rankled so I cancelled the direct debit and told them why, but I never made an official complaint. Maybe I should have done so.
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
What a complete load of twaddle. The only bit I agree with is "Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s" and the political choice would be that of the 1980s - a somewhat pragmatic Tory party or a Labour party with policies so barking mad that nobody votes for them.
Alistair Heath was at primary school in the 1980s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allister_Heath - so I doubt he recalls what it was like. Maggie was not actually very popular but yet she kept winning because of Michael Foot and the left-wing firebrands of the time.
The Tories did not win, apart from the Falklands boost. They won because Labour was such a mess that there was no one else to vote for.
...
Neither of those points is really true. The Tories certainly won the 1987 election on their record and policies. '83 is more of a stretch but there was an uptick in the polls for the Tories before the Falklands War and as interest rates and inflation were coming down, there were positive reasons beyond the war that pushed voters Blue.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
Every Labour supporter who thinks Corbyn has a chance of winning a general election is clearly oblivious of the type of constituencies needed to win an overall majority: places like Bedford, Swindon, Cannock, Worcester, Gloucester, Watford.
I'm guessing that it's not a coincidence that all the constituencies mentioned there are in the South, but much the same applies to the North of England. The sort of suburban / medium-town constituencies of West Yorkshire - the likes of Keighley, Pudsey, Colne Valley or Morley & Outwood - have little in common with his kind of socialism.
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
The phrase used was "once in a generation".
GET OVER IT!
On the sauce early are we?
No, I rarely drink. Is that the best that you can do? Ignore the argument and play the man? Pathetic.
You clearly cannot read. That does not say it is a single, once only referendum. It issues a marketing Call To Action and speculates that it might be the only chance we get. It is not a vow, a promise or a policy. It is your Unionist idiocy that undermines you.
If people want a referendum, they get one or it's UDI time. Bad luck.
You clearly cannot read. That does not say it is a single, once only referendum. It issues a marketing Call To Action and speculates that it might be the only chance we get. It is not a vow, a promise or a policy. It is your Unionist idiocy that undermines you.
If people want a referendum, they get one or it's UDI time. Bad luck.
Hey Dair, give us a laugh, give us your expertise again on VAT, or the location of Tesco's head office, or that ITV isn't part of the EBU.
Neither of those points is really true. The Tories certainly won the 1987 election on their record and policies. '83 is more of a stretch but there was an uptick in the polls for the Tories before the Falklands War and as interest rates and inflation were coming down, there were positive reasons beyond the war that pushed voters Blue.
As I recall it, Maggie was struggling pre-Falklands. I remember many commentators of the time expecting her to lose the next election because her government was very unpopular. Until 1982.
As for 1987, the country was massively polarised. Up here (above the Watford Gap) we had had all the violence and invective and fall-out that came with the miner's strike. If Labour had been electable they probably would have won. In 92 everyone thought Labour had won until the results came through - Labour were celebrating the win before they had the result.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
The SDP were a flash in the pan. They were never an alternative. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government"? I cannot recall anyone who took that seriously.
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
The phrase used was "once in a generation".
GET OVER IT!
On the sauce early are we?
No, I rarely drink. Is that the best that you can do? Ignore the argument and play the man? Pathetic.
Then you're a fesity little caps lock critter, ain't you?
Neither of those points is really true. The Tories certainly won the 1987 election on their record and policies. '83 is more of a stretch but there was an uptick in the polls for the Tories before the Falklands War and as interest rates and inflation were coming down, there were positive reasons beyond the war that pushed voters Blue.
As I recall it, Maggie was struggling pre-Falklands. I remember many commentators of the time expecting her to lose the next election because her government was very unpopular. Until 1982.
As for 1987, the country was massively polarised. Up here (above the Watford Gap) we had had all the violence and invective and fall-out that came with the miner's strike. If Labour had been electable they probably would have won. In 92 everyone thought Labour had won until the results came through - Labour were celebrating the win before they had the result.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
The SDP were a flash in the pan. They were never an alternative. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government"? I cannot recall anyone who took that seriously.
Some of the polls prior to the invasion of the Falklands
Neither of those points is really true. The Tories certainly won the 1987 election on their record and policies. '83 is more of a stretch but there was an uptick in the polls for the Tories before the Falklands War and as interest rates and inflation were coming down, there were positive reasons beyond the war that pushed voters Blue.
As I recall it, Maggie was struggling pre-Falklands. I remember many commentators of the time expecting her to lose the next election because her government was very unpopular. Until 1982.
As for 1987, the country was massively polarised. Up here (above the Watford Gap) we had had all the violence and invective and fall-out that came with the miner's strike. If Labour had been electable they probably would have won. In 92 everyone thought Labour had won until the results came through - Labour were celebrating the win before they had the result.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
The SDP were a flash in the pan. They were never an alternative. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government"? I cannot recall anyone who took that seriously.
Some of the polls prior to the invasion of the Falklands
Neither of those points is really true. The Tories certainly won the 1987 election on their record and policies. '83 is more of a stretch but there was an uptick in the polls for the Tories before the Falklands War and as interest rates and inflation were coming down, there were positive reasons beyond the war that pushed voters Blue.
As I recall it, Maggie was struggling pre-Falklands. I remember many commentators of the time expecting her to lose the next election because her government was very unpopular. Until 1982.
As for 1987, the country was massively polarised. Up here (above the Watford Gap) we had had all the violence and invective and fall-out that came with the miner's strike. If Labour had been electable they probably would have won. In 92 everyone thought Labour had won until the results came through - Labour were celebrating the win before they had the result.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
The SDP were a flash in the pan. They were never an alternative. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government"? I cannot recall anyone who took that seriously.
Some of the polls prior to the invasion of the Falklands
NOP 5/2/1982 - Con 41, Lab 36, SDP 21
Mori 31/3/1982 - Con 35, Lab 30, SDP 33
Stop confusing Beverley's folklore memory with facts!
@Scott_P I think that I've sussed out what's going on. Remember a previous thread on the Fox Hunting vote where you owned Dair? You pointed out that in February, Sturgeon had ruled out the SNP taking part in a vote on Fox Hunting in England and Dair said "It's currently July not February."
FPT the canard that "once in a generation" on Scottish Independence referendums was "just one man's view" - it was the view of both the UK and Scottish Governments:
But I know it's pointless to argue facts with people of faith....
It was in the SNP white paper, but most of the zoomers haven't read it and don't believe it
Absolutely nowhere in any SNP document does it say "we will only hold a single Independence referendum in any particular lifetime".
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
I know that the Nationalist weasels have trouble with the truth, and as head Nat cheerleader on PB you have more trouble than most, but no-one said the Indyref was "once in a lifetime".
The phrase used was "once in a generation".
GET OVER IT!
On the sauce early are we?
No, I rarely drink. Is that the best that you can do? Ignore the argument and play the man? Pathetic.
Then you're a fesity little caps lock critter, ain't you?
I like to use it when the muse takes me. But I wouldn't want to use it on the acceptable face of Scottish Nationalism, like your good self.
@Scott_P I think that I've sussed out what's going on. Remember a previous thread on the Fox Hunting vote where you owned Dair? You pointed out that in February, Sturgeon had ruled out the SNP taking part in a vote on Fox Hunting in England and Dair said "It's currently July not February."
It was July. Now it is August. Sticking with something despite a change in events is a very Conservative philosophy and probably why that party takes so long to do anything good. It took them nearly 200 years to move from Mercantilism to Capitalism under Mrs T.
We cleaned the wound and Jasper is quite chirpy, he is managing to eat and sleep this evening. So we have decided that we will pop to the vets first thing in the morning and let them have a look in case he needs some antibiotics too.
Until this evening, they were both fine HurstLlama. But Jasper lll has just come in with a very nasty eye injury after running into the local feline bully just outside our garden. Just trying to weigh up if an emergency trip to vet tonight or a visit to their weekend surgery tomorrow morning is the best idea. Holly the dog remains very jealous of the cats, but not complaining about the fact that she is getting spoilt and the dog treats have increased since their arrival. As for the two kitties, unfortunately they are already extremely good hunters, and its been carnage in both the garden and house this summer. Little Caitlan ran past me into the house with a rabbit recently which caused me to do something I never normally do, scream! It took a good few minutes for fitaloon and our youngest lad to catch her and get rid of it (shudders)!
How are the kittens getting on? I saw that first picture of two balls of fur but nothing since.
I don't know that we will go the full cat and dog route. The dog can certainly only happen after Thomas the Rescue has gone through the final cat flap (which, alas, I don't think will be too long). Could I really cope with two new kittens and a pup? Dunno and I am not sure I would want to find out.
The joys of having young cats! If they are not hunting they are thieving. Esther, one of or our old team (RIP) once turned up in our kitchen one summer Sunday with half a leg of lamb, nicely roasted with rosemary and garlic - came from next door who had left it unattended on the work-surface to rest before carving but who also left their kitchen door open. The thing was nearly as big as the cat and we never did work out how she got it through the cat flap.
As for Jasper if that was us we would be straight off to the vet with him, but we are soft and don't think straight when our animals are involved.
@Scott_P I think that I've sussed out what's going on. Remember a previous thread on the Fox Hunting vote where you owned Dair? You pointed out that in February, Sturgeon had ruled out the SNP taking part in a vote on Fox Hunting in England and Dair said "It's currently July not February."
It was July. Now it is August. Sticking with something despite a change in events is a very Conservative philosophy and probably why that party takes so long to do anything good. It took them nearly 200 years to move from Mercantilism to Capitalism under Mrs T.
@Dair But we're not discussing the Conservative party, and I'm not a Tory anyway. Your attempt to change the topic to try to distract from your own stance of "whatever policy I feel like at the time" is pathetic.
There is no change of events to justify another Indyref yet, as you well know.
Southam Observer has got you sussed all right. He's posted the observation on PB several times that you and your nationalist chums are just desperate for that international border between Scotland and England. He's right. You're just burned up with it.
You clearly cannot read. That does not say it is a single, once only referendum. It issues a marketing Call To Action and speculates that it might be the only chance we get. It is not a vow, a promise or a policy. It is your Unionist idiocy that undermines you.
If people want a referendum, they get one or it's UDI time. Bad luck.
Hey Dair, give us a laugh, give us your expertise again on VAT, or the location of Tesco's head office, or that ITV isn't part of the EBU.
Given you history you should not be quite so smug. Go make up some more sob stories for saddo's.
Comments
"If it pleases the Court, my client was only researching non-traditional markets"
Didn't some ex-rock star try that defence a few years ago?
I don't see any evidence that feminist thought is seriously influencing commercial porn - there appears to be a large amount of BDSM from sites like Kink.
I've also never seen evidence rape fantasy is common - 25%-40% of women is a minority, not a majority, especially if the figure lies at the lower-end of the scale. It also depends on the terminology used. I guess that far more women have the fantasy of being 'taken' - as opposed to actually being raped. E.g.
Sixty-two percent said they'd had at least one such fantasy. But responses varied depending on the terminology used. When asked about being "overpowered by a man," 52 percent said they'd had that fantasy, the situation most typically depicted in women's romance fiction. But when the term was "rape," only 32 percent said they'd had the fantasy. These findings are in the same ballpark as previous reports.
As for BDSM, I don't think most feminists have an issue with BDSM - BDSM puts a lot of importance on the issue of consent, and sites like Kink in particular emphasize that. Also men are not exclusively doms - women can be too. It's more the influence of aggressive manner in 'vanilla porn' that's an issue.
As for BDSM - while a bit of spanking, tied up etc may be common a lot more of the hardcore stuff that I've seen (that I won't go into on here, because I don't know if it's appropriate) I doubt is common.
The Paedo Card gets pulled at any moment.
WHO
But amid rising concern that Labour is heading for a historic split, Kendall, seen as the centre-right candidate, warns that if Corbyn is elected the party will have no chance of winning an election and could slump to a worse defeat than it suffered under Ed Miliband in May.
http://bit.ly/1JXLn4e
http://www.travella.co.uk/home
Asked my wife what a MILF was the other week because a friend had used the word en passing, like I should have known. She didn't know either so we googled it- my computer went into overdrive.
Allister Heath in The Telegraph making the argument for why it'd be worth it for the left to elect Corbyn.
It would become acceptable again to call for nationalising vast swathes of industry, for massively hiking tax and for demonising business. The centre-ground would move inexorably towards a more statist position. How would the Tories react if Mr Corbyn were to call for a minimum wage of £10 or £12 by 2020, against their £9? Or if he called for the nationalisation of electricity or rail companies?
It would also become far harder for them to reform trade unions: instead of being opposed by a relatively sensible centre-left party, a Corbynite Labour Party would herald a return to the ultra-confrontational 1980s.
Why he came up with that lame excuse god only knows? But I guess he was under a bit of stress at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Piot
I was googling Townshend and Co after their spectacular Glasto show- and saw references to the kiddie porn thing he was cautioned for. Apparently nothing was found on his computer. You might see it on Wikipedia.
It didn't surprise me though- many people take cautions; it's the oldest police trick on the book (that and TIC's) for clearing up crimes without getting any evidence.
From following the threads today, I have finessed my voting position.
1. Kendall
2. Cooper
3. Corbyn
4. Burnham
From a betting standpoint Cooper is my preferred outcome.
As for Jasper if that was us we would be straight off to the vet with him, but we are soft and don't think straight when our animals are involved.
I love the idea of Corbyn-Watson in charge of t'Labour party so it's a simple vote for those two and that's it. Labour will probably do quite well with them two in charge in London, Wales and Scotland in 2016... and goodness knows what will happen if/when Corbyn stands down as promised in 2018: if the Left win again it'll split the party... if the Right regain the party, it'll split...
So will Spurs beat Liverpool to the top of the Premier League table* once again...
I can hardly contain myself.
*ex CLspots
Suggest Stay At Home Mother @ 40.00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O627lnlcdIc
From his Wikipedia page.
"Besides his arrest for assaulting a police officer in 1967 and issues with destruction of property, Townshend was cautioned by British police as part of Operation Ore, a major investigation on child pornography conducted in 2002–2003. Townshend was placed on the sex offenders register for five years in 2003 after admitting he had used his credit card to access a website bearing the message "click here for child porn" four years earlier.[105][106] Later investigation showed that he had visited an ordinary porn site, and not one containing child porn.[107]"
Alistair Heath was at primary school in the 1980s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allister_Heath - so I doubt he recalls what it was like. Maggie was not actually very popular but yet she kept winning because of Michael Foot and the left-wing firebrands of the time.
The Tories did not win, apart from the Falklands boost. They won because Labour was such a mess that there was no one else to vote for.
The lesson of the 80s/90s was - Vote Loony Left, Get Tories.
(The WHO is supporting pretty much all the serious trials)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/lukebailey/labour-theory-of-ale?utm_term=.cizZV6yNL
I admit that £4 per month was not going to kill me but the sheer dishonesty of it rankled so I cancelled the direct debit and told them why, but I never made an official complaint. Maybe I should have done so.
And there was an alternative. For several months in late 1981 and early 1982, the SDP-Liberal Alliance was polling around 40%. In fact, the Falklands effect affected the Alliance score much more than Labour's, though they had also been on the slide before hostilities commenced (but were still polling top-side of 30%). We write that off now as a mid-term protest; just another failure to break the two-party system. But as an alternative it was there and many people were prepared to consider it.
You still don't get it. The marketing Call To Action is perfectly fine, it is 2015, people understand marketing. It wasn't a vow, it wasn't a promise and Unionists just look stupid when they try to avoid a democratic end to the United Kingdom based on their Unionist lies.
Zoomers. Can't read.
The phrase used was "once in a generation".
GET OVER IT!
That has win written all over it...
Once in a generation ... of the midge.
Is that the best that you can do? Ignore the argument and play the man?
Pathetic.
How about focussing on the White Paper's oil revenues projections?
That was great comedy
Zoomers. Can't read.
You clearly cannot read. That does not say it is a single, once only referendum. It issues a marketing Call To Action and speculates that it might be the only chance we get. It is not a vow, a promise or a policy. It is your Unionist idiocy that undermines you.
If people want a referendum, they get one or it's UDI time. Bad luck.
If people want a referendum, they get one or it's UDI time. Bad luck.
Hey Dair, give us a laugh, give us your expertise again on VAT, or the location of Tesco's head office, or that ITV isn't part of the EBU.
As for 1987, the country was massively polarised. Up here (above the Watford Gap) we had had all the violence and invective and fall-out that came with the miner's strike. If Labour had been electable they probably would have won. In 92 everyone thought Labour had won until the results came through - Labour were celebrating the win before they had the result. The SDP were a flash in the pan. They were never an alternative. "Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government"? I cannot recall anyone who took that seriously.
NOP 5/2/1982 - Con 41, Lab 36, SDP 21
Mori 31/3/1982 - Con 35, Lab 30, SDP 33
New Thread
I think that I've sussed out what's going on. Remember a previous thread on the Fox Hunting vote where you owned Dair?
You pointed out that in February, Sturgeon had ruled out the SNP taking part in a vote on Fox Hunting in England and Dair said "It's currently July not February." I like to use it when the muse takes me.
But I wouldn't want to use it on the acceptable face of Scottish Nationalism, like your good self.
It doesnt say that. You lose the argument as usual.
But we're not discussing the Conservative party, and I'm not a Tory anyway.
Your attempt to change the topic to try to distract from your own stance of "whatever policy I feel like at the time" is pathetic.
There is no change of events to justify another Indyref yet, as you well know.
Southam Observer has got you sussed all right. He's posted the observation on PB several times that you and your nationalist chums are just desperate for that international border between Scotland and England. He's right. You're just burned up with it.
Given you history you should not be quite so smug. Go make up some more sob stories for saddo's.