f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

I'm dismissing it because the ONLY reason they publish it is to whip up the stupid into a race hate frenzy and it works!

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

I want to comment but dont want to be seen as racist. I personally feel uncomfortable when i see a woman wearing one. Only becuase i feel they have something to hide.

The karan says to respect the law of the land your in and if the law in this country is to remove it then they need to shut up and follow the law. Or move out!

The Dogs B******s

Racist

mrmadcap

Don't think there is anything racist about people feeling uncomfortable about other people walking around with their faces covered in the UK.

I mean historically when has this ever happened in this country, apart from Dick Turpin, the great train robbers and the bad guys in the Sweeney?

dpb

All them was blokes

mrmadcap

Sexist

cster

EFA

hodgy0_2

No, because she has a face like a slapped fish

madscoob

iTrader: (3)

so if it is to be agreed that wearing it treat's schoolgirls like second class citizens, wtf is the difference with grown women ?

Shaid

It was the first paragraph I couldn't argue with. As for the second my advise is simple. Sort your own house first then you can be in a position to judge.

Martin2005

I do hope you never exceed 70mph on a motorway

mrmadcap

I've just thumbed through the Koran and it doesn't say anything about speed limits on motorways. Which version are you reading? I may have a different version.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

I see our f**kwit government have ordered a report into the NHS policy over the wearing of veils by NHS staff yet this afternoon despite repeated efforts Radio 5 Live could not find one person who either wore on or knew someone who wore one or wnated to wear one whilst working in the NHS!!

You really would think that clown Cameron and his moron cronies could find more important things to waste taxpayers' money on.

madscoob

iTrader: (3)

heres a extra laugh to throw in the mix. what about wearing one while driving and getting photo taken by a forward facing camera van, how the *** would they be able to identify and prosicute the driver if there was more than one woman on the cars insurance policy ?

RA Dunk

Fair play that's quite a valid one, be interesting to see how People defend this one?

madscoob

iTrader: (3)

being such honest people they would confess straight away, roflmfao

Martin2005

Maybe I'm getting the Koran confused with The Highway Code, it's definitely in there, right next to 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'

Dingdongler

Do you ever miss a trick to slag off the government? What exactly are you ranting about this time?

The govt have probably been questioned by the media as to what the policy is and the govt have asked the NHS the same question.

What exactly is the big deal? There is nothing in it to accuse the govt of being incompetent, full of cronies and wasting tax payers money.

And just for you mate here is a pic of your best friend last night, he was an excellent host

hodgy0_2

The totty to his right looks game

tony de wonderful

What a bunch of phonies and *** kissers hanging on Gideons every word.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

No they have commissioned a report into something which is a complete non-event and why? You reckon because of the media... well they shouldn't kowtow to the media! Unless of course it all helps come election time!! This IS another waste of taxpayers' money, it's a complete non story started by the likes of the Daily Mail and lapped up by morons including it would seem Chief C**t Cameron!

Yes I am sure he was , after all everyone has to be good at something and so far it's the only thing in his case What's really funny is you think spending an evening in his company is something worth boasting about!!

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Er... the photo isn't considered evidence and can only be used by the keeper of the vehicle to aid them in identifying the driver.

RA Dunk

You sure I thought there had to be photographic evidence?

Dingdongler

You've always been a man with insight.

She was a major topic of conversation believe me. She actually looked much fitter in real life, what you can't see in the pics is her gorgeous a88. She is actually his PA

Dingdongler

Grow up and stop spouting teenage tripe like TDW.

And btw I have nothing to boast about, it was a charity event

hodgy0_2

Yep, the longed limbed beauty of the public school educated English female,

Good stuff, and can undoubtedly hold a decent conversation too

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Well so did I, but a couple of years ago a friend of mine from Aus was over here driving my car and she got snapped by the Lacashire Constabulary in a camera van. Think we had a thread about it actually.

Anyway they sent me the NIP and I replied to say that it was my Aussie friend driving which of course they thought was me trying to wriggle out of it using the old foreign friend trick. I asked for the photo and it clearly showed a blonde woman at the wheel. I pointed this out to them but they said it wasn't admissable as driver identity evidence and could only be used by me to help idetnify the driver if I was unsure.

They then asked me to prove she was in the country and insured on my vehicle as they had written to her and got no reply... yes they sent a letter to Aus LOL! She wouldn't have replied as she was still here

Now they may have been telling porkies as like you I thought the photo was evidence and was required in order to prosecute, but their arguent was the photo was required just to prove the vehicle was there and speeding not for ID purposes, I have a letter with it in so would have thought it was right!

All that over 35 in a 30 too

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

EFA

You may not mind them systematically wasting your taxes, but I object to them wasting mine. If that's a problem for you kindly deal with it yourself!

Well it's the second thread you have felt the need to mention it in so I think you are doing a bit of the 'look at me' thing! I doubt I'm alone in that thought either!

RA Dunk

Hmmm, not sure what to make of this now.

My mates parents got a NIP in the post one day but as they couldn't identify who was driving by the photo and none of the parents actually knew or could remember being caught by camera it got dropped as they couldn't prove who was driving?

Basically they needed the photo as evidence to prove who was driving.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

No they just chose not prosecute because your parents couldn't identify the driver. They would have been within the law to prosecte the vehicle's registered keepr. On this occasion they seem to have exercised some common sense however it's happened many times sadly!