Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her >Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin <riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her
Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
looks like it
so vote for staliner
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin <riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
looks like it
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of
cake.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that.
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her >>> Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
looks like it
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of cake.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to evade >that. Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking and be
kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood of the
press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
On 22/05/2023 01:15 pm, Pilotiin wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her
Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
That's it.
And according to BBC TV news today, there is precedent for individuals
to take the speed awareness course singly.
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
looks like it
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can take her >>> Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of cake.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that. Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking
and be kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood of the
press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
On Mon, 22 May 2023 14:47:33 +0100
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
In other news, Rishi Sunak was seen nicking a biro from the
Number Ten stationery cupboard. Civil servants immediately reported
him for bullying.
looks like it
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of
cake.
But taking a speed awareness course privately isn't.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that.
If she went on an ordinary speed awareness course, she'd have to have
her whole entourage of security people and work assistants with her.
Does that sound like a productive idea?
so vote for staliner
In message <u4frpk$263pc$1@dont-email.me>, Pancho
<Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
 looks like it
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her
Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
 so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of
cake.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that. Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking
and be kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Public humiliation? Do we know how fast she was going?
While I certainly
don't condone blatant speeding, she might have only been slightly over
the limit.
How many of us have been fortunate to escape been done for
occasionally exceeding the speed limit (often inadvertently)? I've been driving for over sixty years, and so far have escaped, but with the increasing number of speed cameras, and lower speed limits, I'm sure it
can only be a matter of time! But will I need to be publicly humiliated?
I hope not.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood of the
press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
Detestable as she is, surely this is simply an essentially unfounded witch-hunt?
Firstly, apparently ANYONE can apply for a personal Speed Awareness course.
Then there's the question of all the additional security required to
have her sitting in room of unknown, random plebs.
Her only 'crime' appears to be asking someone in the Civil Service to
arrange a personal session - but is that much different from a company
boss telling one of his secretaries that it was his wedding anniversary,
so could she/he book a table for a meal at the local McDonald's?
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous,
than having a bite of cake.
Part of her punishment should be public
humiliation, she sought to evade that.
Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking
and be kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood
of the press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous,
than having a bite of cake.
depends on how fat you are
who runs the country? the 'civil' 'service'
or the elected...or even the reptiles
And according to BBC TV news today, there is precedent
for individuals to take the speed awareness course singly.
On Mon, 22 May 2023 14:47:33 +0100, Pancho wrote:
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous,
than having a bite of cake.
Part of her punishment should be public
humiliation, she sought to evade that.
We don't know what she did. The Archbishop of Canterbury was 'done' for 25
in 20mph zone. That's easily done, and automobiles don't get to be a
serious hazard until over 35, I think.
Wasn't the Home Sec. trying to avoid attending a class with ordinary
people, who are not privy councillors and cannot be blamed for everything that's wrong, and a lot that's right, in the UK?
Suella Braverman should be blamed for not having a serious crime
prevention and management policy.
Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking
and be kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Absolutely true. I agree, but not because she drives a car and behaves
like an ordinary human being.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood
of the press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
Tories don't do ethics. If they did they wouldn't be Tories.
In message <u4frpk$263pc$1@dont-email.me>, Pancho
<Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
 looks like it
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her
Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
 so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of
cake.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that. Personally, I think she should face a ceremonial sacking
and be kept out of the cabinet for a short period.
Public humiliation? Do we know how fast she was going? While I certainly don't condone blatant speeding, she might have only been slightly over
the limit. How many of us have been fortunate to escape been done for occasionally exceeding the speed limit (often inadvertently)? I've been driving for over sixty years, and so far have escaped, but with the increasing number of speed cameras, and lower speed limits, I'm sure it
can only be a matter of time! But will I need to be publicly humiliated?
I hope not.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood of the
press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
Detestable as she is, surely this is simply an essentially unfounded witch-hunt?
Firstly, apparently ANYONE can apply for a personal Speed Awareness course.
Then there's the question of all the additional security required to
have her sitting in room of unknown, random plebs.
Her only 'crime' appears to be asking someone in the Civil Service to
arrange a personal session - but is that much different from a company
boss telling one of his secretaries that it was his wedding anniversary,
so could she/he book a table for a meal at the local McDonald's?
On 22/05/2023 15:24, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 14:47:33 +0100
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
In other news, Rishi Sunak was seen nicking a biro from the
Number Ten stationery cupboard. Civil servants immediately reported
him for bullying.
Not really. Speeding is a crime, more risky than eating cake at work
during Covid restrictions. We saw the hoo-ha about cake eating. If the
press are to be consistent, we should expect them to wheel our family
members of speed related fatalities. Crying about Suella laughing at
their tragedy.
looks like it
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite of
cake.
But taking a speed awareness course privately isn't.
No, but that, and trying to cover up the speeding offence, is more
serious than trying to cover up having a bite of cake. There is a direct correspondence. Actually, Braverman's behaviour is worse, covering up
after an official conviction.
The normal MSM comment is, if only she had said sorry in the first place.
Part of her punishment should be public humiliation, she sought to
evade that.
If she went on an ordinary speed awareness course, she'd have to have
her whole entourage of security people and work assistants with her.
Does that sound like a productive idea?
Well, yes, I do think it is a productive idea. One, it would give us
insight to Braverman's character, and two, it would help publicise
speeding punishments as a deterrent.
Very rarely do they prosecute people for slightly over the limit.
On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:41:46 +0100
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
On 23/05/2023 08:42, Ian Jackson wrote:
Public humiliation? Do we know how fast she was going?
Yes, too fast, significantly over the limit.
My own experiences was that you don't get the chance of a
speed awareness course if you were significantly over the limit. You get
a fine and points without the option.
While I certainly
don't condone blatant speeding, she might have only been slightly
over the limit.
Very rarely do they prosecute people for slightly over the limit.
They don't prosecute, no. They issue an FPN and/or send you on a speed awareness course.
How many of us have been fortunate to escape been done for
occasionally exceeding the speed limit (often inadvertently)? I've
been driving for over sixty years, and so far have escaped, but
with the increasing number of speed cameras, and lower speed
limits, I'm sure it can only be a matter of time! But will I need
to be publicly humiliated? I hope not.
One solution would be to obey speed limits, actually obey the law,
then the increasing number of cameras won't matter.
It's so easy to never make a mistake isn't it? Yes, yes, very easy
indeed.
On 23/05/2023 08:42, Ian Jackson wrote:
Public humiliation? Do we know how fast she was going?
Yes, too fast, significantly over the limit.
While I certainly
don't condone blatant speeding, she might have only been slightly
over the limit.
Very rarely do they prosecute people for slightly over the limit.
How many of us have been fortunate to escape been done for
occasionally exceeding the speed limit (often inadvertently)? I've
been driving for over sixty years, and so far have escaped, but
with the increasing number of speed cameras, and lower speed
limits, I'm sure it can only be a matter of time! But will I need
to be publicly humiliated? I hope not.
One solution would be to obey speed limits, actually obey the law,
then the increasing number of cameras won't matter.
Presumably, the ethics advisor will closely examine the mood of
the press and then decide on the "ethical" course of action.
Detestable as she is, surely this is simply an essentially
unfounded witch-hunt?
Firstly, apparently ANYONE can apply for a personal Speed Awareness
course.
Well, I doubt my wish would be granted.
I also couldn't get the civil
service to do it for me.
Then there's the question of all the additional security required
to have her sitting in room of unknown, random plebs.
Her only 'crime' appears to be asking someone in the Civil Service
to arrange a personal session - but is that much different from a
company boss telling one of his secretaries that it was his wedding anniversary, so could she/he book a table for a meal at the local McDonald's?
Her 'crime' is speeding. Attempting to concealing a crime from the
public is inappropriate for a politician/public official. The Public,
her employer, should expect full disclosure of criminal convictions.
Using civil servants to abet concealing a criminal conviction is a
misuse of public funds.
It isn't Braverman's only serious error in the last year.
On 23/05/2023 20:20, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:41:46 +0100
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
On 23/05/2023 08:42, Ian Jackson wrote:
Public humiliation? Do we know how fast she was going?
Yes, too fast, significantly over the limit.
My own experiences was that you don't get the chance of a
speed awareness course if you were significantly over the limit. You get
a fine and points without the option.
While I certainly
don't condone blatant speeding, she might have only been slightly
over the limit.
Very rarely do they prosecute people for slightly over the limit.
They don't prosecute, no. They issue an FPN and/or send you on a speed
awareness course.
The option of a speed awareness course is only available if you haven't
been on one for 3 years.
How many of us have been fortunate to escape been done for
occasionally exceeding the speed limit (often inadvertently)? I've
been driving for over sixty years, and so far have escaped, but
with the increasing number of speed cameras, and lower speed
limits, I'm sure it can only be a matter of time! But will I need
to be publicly humiliated? I hope not.
One solution would be to obey speed limits, actually obey the law,
then the increasing number of cameras won't matter.
It's so easy to never make a mistake isn't it? Yes, yes, very easy
indeed.
One moment of inattentiveness to speed and that's all it takes.
On 22/05/2023 15:24, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 14:47:33 +0100
Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
On 22/05/2023 13:40, abelard wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2023 12:15:53 -0000 (UTC), Pilotiin
<riemh4lxqfzj.nospam@opayq.com> wrote:
Suella Braverman asked the people with whom she works if she can
take her Speed Awareness meditation course in private.
Is that it?
In other news, Rishi Sunak was seen nicking a biro from the
Number Ten stationery cupboard. Civil servants immediately reported
him for bullying.
Not really. Speeding is a crime, more risky than eating cake at work
during Covid restrictions. We saw the hoo-ha about cake eating. If
the press are to be consistent, we should expect them to wheel our
family members of speed related fatalities. Crying about Suella
laughing at their tragedy.
looks like it
so vote for staliner
Speeding is a lot more serious, more dangerous, than having a bite
of cake.
But taking a speed awareness course privately isn't.
No, but that, and trying to cover up the speeding offence, is more
serious than trying to cover up having a bite of cake. There is a
direct correspondence. Actually, Braverman's behaviour is worse,
covering up after an official conviction.
[SNIP]
Detestable as she is, surely this is simply an essentially unfounded witch-hunt?
Firstly, apparently ANYONE can apply for a personal Speed Awareness
course.
Then there's the question of all the additional security required to
have her sitting in room of unknown, random plebs.
Her only 'crime' appears to be asking someone in the Civil Service to
arrange a personal session - but is that much different from a
company boss telling one of his secretaries that it was his wedding anniversary, so could she/he book a table for a meal at the local
McDonald's?
Ignoring Chequers today ... Boris was guilty of lying to Parliament.
That's a far greater offence than attending a speed awareness course
on your own.
[SNIP]
The way that I read that is not that she asked a civil servant to
arrange anything. It was that she asked whether it were possible.
Has the left really lost it to the extant that making enquiries of the
civil servant as to policy is "Bad"?
If you can't ask a civil servant in the Home Office about punitive
policy, who *can* you ask?
On Wed, 24 May 2023 10:04:30 +0100 Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
Ignoring Chequers today ... Boris was guilty of lying to Parliament.
That's a far greater offence than attending a speed awareness course
on your own.
It used to be once, but you are going back many decades.
Ted Heath put a final end to that idea. And no, the population didn't
find out that he was lying for many years, but a good many senior
politicians knew at the time that he was, and said nothing.
It's not just us, in the US many civil servants have been shown to
have lied to Congress, but no form of censure has been applied. Biden
can't really be said to have lied to anyone, as he's only reading a
script, on those occasions when he's fairly coherent.
It's not even just politicians, who today are automatically assumed
to be lying when they have their mouths open. The whole ideas of
honour, integrity, keeping promises and other contracts, it's all
been swept away. The values that have maintained and improved
civilisations for centuries have been dismissed as 'racist' and
'elitist'.
'The two highest achievements of the human mind are the twin concepts
of "loyalty" and "duty". Whenever these twin concepts fall into
disrepute, get out of there fast! You may possibly save yourself, but
it is too late to save that society. It is doomed.'
R A Heinlein 1987
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
The way that I read that is not that she asked
a civil servant to arrange anything. It was that
she asked whether it were possible.
Has the left really lost it to the extant that making
enquiries of the civil servant as to policy is "Bad"?
If you can't ask a civil servant in the Home Office
about punitive policy, who *can* you ask?
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
Electric vehicles do, don't they?
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicleElectric vehicles do, don't they?
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck in
work, decades ago.
In message <kd9001F8nmlU2@mid.individual.net>, JNugent <jenningsandco@mail.com> writes
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle Electric vehicles do, don't they?
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck in
work, decades ago.
The 20 limit will be fine for electric vehicles, as pollution is not speed/gear dependant (apart, maybe, from tyre wear). However, in large
areas of 20 limits, when having to drive in third gear all the time
surely this will lead to an increase of pollution? When this is
realised, will the next step be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
JNugent <jenningsandco@mail.com> writes
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
 Electric vehicles do, don't they?
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck in
work, decades ago.
The 20 limit will be fine for electric vehicles, as pollution is not speed/gear dependant (apart, maybe, from tyre wear)...
However, in large
areas of 20 limits, when having to drive in third gear all the time
surely this will lead to an increase of pollution? When this is
realised, will the next step be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
On 25/05/2023 14:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message <kd9001F8nmlU2@mid.individual.net>, JNugent >><jenningsandco@mail.com> writes
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:The 20 limit will be fine for electric vehicles, as pollution is not >>speed/gear dependant (apart, maybe, from tyre wear). However, in large >>areas of 20 limits, when having to drive in third gear all the time
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicleElectric vehicles do, don't they?
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck
in work, decades ago.
surely this will lead to an increase of pollution? When this is
realised, will the next step be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
I don't see why. Pollution per time unit will be lower at 20mph than
30mph.
Presumably, over time, lower journey levels with IC vehicles will
lower overall pollution.
The IC will be banned/discouraged, but that will be independent of
20mph zones.
Do we know Braver asked someone in the Civil Service to arrange a personal session?
My impression is that she inquired about a personal session but
it wasn't possible.
When this is realised, will the next step
be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
...and in case, is emitted outside London, where people apparently
don't matter and it is perfectly acceptable to dump London
emissions in their environment, just as it is apparently fine for
the waste of nearly ten million Londoners to be dumped within the
Home Counties.
Don't put ideas into the loonies' heads.
In message <u4ntr0$3eqkc$2@dont-email.me>, Pancho
<Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
On 25/05/2023 14:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message <kd9001F8nmlU2@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
<jenningsandco@mail.com> writes
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:Â The 20 limit will be fine for electric vehicles, as pollution is not
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle Electric vehicles do, don't they?
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck
in work, decades ago.
speed/gear dependant (apart, maybe, from tyre wear). However, in
large areas of 20 limits, when having to drive in third gear all the
time surely this will lead to an increase of pollution? When this is
realised, will the next step be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
I don't see why. Pollution per time unit will be lower at 20mph than
30mph.
I doubt it. At 20 you'll never manage to get into the more-economical
fourth gear. Also, your in-motion journey time will be around a third
longer than at 30.
Presumably, over time, lower journey levels with IC vehicles will
lower overall pollution.
But as I suggest above, will pollution levels actually be lower? Not
long ago, to reduce pollution, didn't they put a lower speed limit on a motorway in South Wales (Google required) only to find that because of
longer times, the pollution actually went up? (Again, Google required).
On 25/05/2023 22:30, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message <u4ntr0$3eqkc$2@dont-email.me>, Pancho
<Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes
On 25/05/2023 14:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
JNugent <jenningsandco@mail.com> writes
On 25/05/2023 10:42 am, Pilotiin wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2023 01:28:16 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...especially in one of Khan's new 20mph limits. The vehicle
feels as though it has all but stopped dead. And no car or
van is running efficiently at such speeds.
 Electric vehicles do, don't they?
Never driven one (well except for a brief go on the fork-lift truck
in work, decades ago.
 The 20 limit will be fine for electric vehicles, as pollution is
not speed/gear dependant (apart, maybe, from tyre wear). However, in
large areas of 20 limits, when having to drive in third gear all the
time surely this will lead to an increase of pollution? When this is
realised, will the next step be to ban all IC vehicles from 20 areas?
I don't see why. Pollution per time unit will be lower at 20mph than
30mph.
I doubt it. At 20 you'll never manage to get into the more-economical
fourth gear. Also, your in-motion journey time will be around a third
longer than at 30.
You are insisting economy is based, per journey. People often present
this is an absolute truth.
In fact, we know that higher journey speed tends, in general, to
increase journey distance.
Presumably, over time, lower journey levels with IC vehicles will
lower overall pollution.
But as I suggest above, will pollution levels actually be lower? Not
long ago, to reduce pollution, didn't they put a lower speed limit on
a motorway in South Wales (Google required) only to find that because
of longer times, the pollution actually went up? (Again, Google
required).
The assumption is that IC journeys will decrease. To some extent due to
20mph zones, and to some extent due to the introduction of electric
vehicles.
On Thu, 25 May 2023 17:03:31 +0100, JNugent wrote:
...and in case, is emitted outside London, where people apparently
don't matter and it is perfectly acceptable to dump London
emissions in their environment, just as it is apparently fine for
the waste of nearly ten million Londoners to be dumped within the
Home Counties.
In your previous incarnation, were you a senior civil servant in the
Cabinet Office?
Don't put ideas into the loonies' heads.
They don't need our help.
In your previous incarnation, were you a senior
civil servant in the Cabinet Office?
Hmmm...
Why do you ask?
In fact, we know that higher journey speed tends,
in general,to increase journey distance.
On Fri, 26 May 2023 14:40:44 +0100, JNugent wrote:
In your previous incarnation, were you a senior
civil servant in the Cabinet Office?
Hmmm...
Why do you ask?
Getting your facts rights.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 483 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 86:06:36 |
| Calls: | 9,577 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 13,666 |
| Messages: | 6,143,449 |
| Posted today: | 2 |