"Mait001" wrote in message
...
which remind me, the people that man the permement anti-war (and bolt
on a load of unrelated issues) protest outside parliment - what do
they do for a living and how come they get so much time off?



Actually, from what I have read, it is "protestor" (singular noun) and
Parliament is about to pass an Act of Parliament to get rid of him (why
they
just don't sweep it all away when he is absent - which seems to be most of
the
time) I do not understand.

To answer your subsidiary questions: he is undoubtedly unemployed /
unemployable and people like me, law-abiding taxpayers, are funding his
indolent and useless lifestyle.

If he is getting up the noses of the politicians to the point where they are
wanting to take specific action to remove him he is hardly being "indolent
and useless".

If no one will give him a job then he is at least causing political
discomfort to others at a cost of physical discomfort to himself. Again
hardly "indolent and useless".

Someone who sits on their backside at home however, complaining about people
who make their voice heard is almost certainly "indolent and useless".

Until you drag certain cultures out
of the stone age it'll never end.

You cant do that you imperialist! remember every culture is supieror
to western culture, never forget that.

If he is getting up the noses of the politicians to the point where they are
wanting to take specific action to remove him he is hardly being "indolent
and useless".

Parliament wasting time, which could be more usefully spent, in getting rid of
this eyesore, is hardly, I would suggest "useful".

If no one will give him a job then he is at least causing political
discomfort to others at a cost of physical discomfort to himself. Again
hardly "indolent and useless".

If he is unable to fulfil the basic requirements of being employed, i.e.
attending work instead of sitting in Parliament Square most of the day, then it
this that makes him unemployable.

Someone who sits on their backside at home however, complaining about people
who make their voice heard is almost certainly "indolent and useless".

I, unlike the object of this thread, am up "off my backside" by 6.30a.m. most
mornings and (traffic and trains allowing) on my way to wrl by 7.30am. and
often not home till 8 or 9p.m. For why? So that I can provide for me and mine,
and also, seemingly, to provide for the no-hoped already rferred to.

At least HE cannot think me "indolent" or "useless" since without me and those
of my ilk he would die of starvation.

Marc.

Mait001 wrote:
If he is getting up the noses of the politicians to the
point where they are wanting to take specific action to
remove him he is hardly being "indolent and useless".

Parliament wasting time, which could be more usefully
spent, in getting rid of this eyesore, is hardly, I would
suggest "useful".

You really ought to try seeing the big picture.


If no one will give him a job then he is at least causing
political discomfort to others at a cost of physical
discomfort to himself. Again hardly "indolent and useless".

If he is unable to fulfil the basic requirements of being
employed, i.e. attending work instead of sitting in
Parliament Square most of the day, then it this that makes
him unemployable.

Highly unlikely since by being there he is making himself unavailable for
work and would therefore have his Jobseekers Allowance stopped. It is
possible that he has health problems that causes potential employers not to
offer him a job.


Someone who sits on their backside at home however,
complaining about people who make their voice heard is
almost certainly "indolent and useless".

I, unlike the object of this thread, am up "off my
backside" by 6.30a.m. most mornings and (traffic and trains
allowing) on my way to wrl by 7.30am. and often not home
till 8 or 9p.m. For why? So that I can provide for me and
mine, and also, seemingly, to provide for the no-hoped
already rferred to.

At least HE cannot think me "indolent" or "useless" since
without me and those of my ilk he would die of starvation.

Did someone suggest your were indolent?

"Cast_Iron" wrote in message ...
Highly unlikely since by being there he is making himself unavailable for
work and would therefore have his Jobseekers Allowance stopped. It is
possible that he has health problems that causes potential employers not to
offer him a job.

Well he can't be too physically ill to be able to camp out rough for that
long. Mentally however its quite obvious he's not fireing on all cylinders
in which case why the hell would anybody be the slightest bit interested in
his opinion? If I want some political insight I'll get it from the media or
even listen to a politician occasionally , I don't head off to the local
funny farm to consult the nutcases and other assorted retards within. The
sooner this waste of space is moved on the better though it does worry me
that we have to pass an act of parliament to move him. Has no one in the
government the balls to just get some police or a bunch of squaddies down and
shift him or are they all too worried about what the PC muesli munchers in
islington will say about it?

B2003

(Boltar) wrote the following in:
om

"Cast_Iron" wrote in message
...
Highly unlikely since by being there he is making himself
unavailable for work and would therefore have his Jobseekers
Allowance stopped. It is possible that he has health problems
that causes potential employers not to offer him a job.

Well he can't be too physically ill to be able to camp out rough
for that long. Mentally however its quite obvious he's not fireing
on all cylinders in which case why the hell would anybody be the
slightest bit interested in his opinion?

If he is mentally ill and unemployable as you keep saying, why are you
complaining about the government funding his life? What are you
suggesting as an alternative? Letting him die?

--
message by Robin May, consumer of liquids
If bathroom means toilet in America, I'll have a shower please.

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

Boltar wrote:
"Cast_Iron" wrote in message
...
Highly unlikely since by being there he is making himself
unavailable for
work and would therefore have his Jobseekers Allowance
stopped. It is
possible that he has health problems that causes potential
employers not to
offer him a job.

Well he can't be too physically ill to be able to camp out
rough for that
long. Mentally however its quite obvious he's not fireing
on all cylinders
in which case why the hell would anybody be the slightest
bit interested in
his opinion? If I want some political insight I'll get it
from the media or
even listen to a politician occasionally , I don't head off
to the local
funny farm to consult the nutcases and other assorted
retards within. The
sooner this waste of space is moved on the better though it
does worry me
that we have to pass an act of parliament to move him. Has
no one in the
government the balls to just get some police or a bunch of
squaddies down and
shift him or are they all too worried about what the PC
muesli munchers in
islington will say about it?

Seems like you've got mental health problem's as well, you just don't know
it yet. Since when could we rely on politicians or the media for anything
objective? They're pursuing their own agenda's; this guy however has no axe
to grind.

Just because someone has such a problem doesn't make them wrong in their
views, nor does it make them a "retard" nor a "nutter". There are many
highly creative and intelligent people who suffer from mental health
problems. Grow up and stop confusing illness and inttelligence.

You can only use the police to shift him if he is commiting an offence.
Since MPs are having to pass a new Bill and by so doing create a new law to
get rid of him, it's obvious he's not; merely excercising his right to free
speech and peaceful protest. Having such a closed, narrow mind that you
dismiss the message because you disapprove of the messenger says more about
you that it does him.

Someone who sits on their backside at home however,
complaining about people who make their voice heard is
almost certainly "indolent and useless".

I, unlike the object of this thread, am up "off my
backside" by 6.30a.m. most mornings and (traffic and trains
allowing) on my way to wrl by 7.30am. and often not home
till 8 or 9p.m. For why? So that I can provide for me and
mine, and also, seemingly, to provide for the no-hoped
already rferred to.

At least HE cannot think me "indolent" or "useless" since
without me and those of my ilk he would die of starvation.

Did someone suggest your were indolent?



Yes: see the sentence above beginning "Someone who sits on their backside....."

Marc.



Marc.

Well he can't be too physically ill to be able to camp out rough for that
long. Mentally however its quite obvious he's not fireing on all cylinders
in which case why the hell would anybody be the slightest bit interested in
his opinion? If I want some political insight I'll get it from the media or
even listen to a politician occasionally , I don't head off to the local
funny farm to consult the nutcases and other assorted retards within. The
sooner this waste of space is moved on the better though it does worry me
that we have to pass an act of parliament to move him. Has no one in the
government the balls to just get some police or a bunch of squaddies down and
shift him or are they all too worried about what the PC muesli munchers in
islington will say about it?

B2003



Yet again, B2003, I find myself in total agreement with you!

Marc.

Cast_Iron wrote:
Someone who sits on their backside at home however,
complaining about people who make their voice heard is
almost certainly "indolent and useless".

significant snippage

Cast_Iron wrote:
Did someone suggest your were indolent?



Mait001 wrote:
Yes: see the sentence above beginning "Someone who sits on
their backside....."

What a sensitive soul you are. Like most bullies, always ready to hand out
abuse to others but then takes a suggestion aimed at the world in general as
if it's a direct personal attack. You'd best go and find your Mummy's apron
to dry your tears.