Thursday, 4 July 2013

Pencil Sketch of the Inside of St George the Martyr Church in Ramsgate and a ramble.

My day off today and I attended something called a transition day at the Church of St George the Martyr in Ramsgate, this wasn’t a religious event, but something to with having children.


Anyway here is the sketch from the gallery, where I was listening to educational transitional information.


Another new shop in Ramsgate, Dragon Carp, a huge fishing tackle shop.

 While on the subject of shops here is a picture of the inside of the new “Old Sweet Shoppe”




Still one subject of shops here is the new “Ahoy Fishmonger” in Queen Street.


36 comments:

  1. DragonCarp is owned by the same owners as Sports Direct.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What I need is fresh and locally caught fish at a good price. I wish 'Ahoy Shipmonger' well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Talking of sweet shops: does anyone else remember Rowlands in Harbour St? I spent many an hour as a child with my nose pressed to their window watching sweets being made.

    I wish the 'Old Sweet Shoppe' well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Two posts from Holyer on the same subject. And we wonder why this blog is in decline. Symptomatic of the towns: dull pensioners whining and wasting the heritage.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr Holyer have you seen this: http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/chris-smee/54/486/320 I see you think he is 5th rate as you concur with hammy
    Do you know him personally?

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14njUwJUg1I

    amazing video definitely looks like a couple of bloggers

    ReplyDelete
  7. Barry your 6:17pm

    I did not say that he was 5th rate, those are your words, not mine. I said that he was unable to direct me to any of his work. I pay scant attention to any profile on Linkedin and similar bearing in mind that one can put up anything unchallenged. As I have done with mine for the hell of it. As for being weird, anyone who runs with the Red hall Massive is weird to me.

    No I do not know him personally. I have no reason to doubt that he is a decent bloke, who is kind to his friends and family.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am confused as to why you believe he runs with the red hall. Where does that come from?

      Delete
  8. Barry your 6:35 pm,

    Very amusing. Is one of them you?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Farnie BarnardJuly 05, 2013 8:24 pm

    Probably because in association with Tongue (of Red Hall fame) Smee was spotted down in Margate filming the protest anti-cuts and live exports rabble who, out to target David Cameron, only succeeded in shouting abuse at RNLI crew members. Probably, in their simple minds, thought they were some kind on uniformed facist police.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Barry,

    Farnie has answered your question for me. I could not put it better.

    It has just occurred to me, why are you asking me questions on this blog about something that I wrote on another blog? Surely it would more appropriate for you to question me where my post first appeared?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John if only that were possible.

      Farnie I have spoken with Chris and I think you have mistakenly identified who was filming with Christine. He has never met her and he doesnt film events

      Delete
    2. Seems that Barry likes to bring all of his debates on to here, despite Michael requesting people not to keep starting off-topic conversations.

      Delete
    3. Barry 8:46pm,

      Yes I already knew the answer. But I would rather avoid any more personal arguments on Michael's blog.

      Delete
    4. as I said to John anon 8:54 the chance of being able to have a conversation on hammy's blog is nonexistent and I have already apologised to Michael and he sees why

      Delete
    5. John your 8:57 I agree but what is the solution. I have no problem with a face to face to discuss but the hamster doesnt.

      He doesnt refute what I post on my own blog just brings out the same old argument "proof" at least I know you read my blog.
      What I post is researched fully because I am fully aware of the Libel issues then on his blog he uses misinformation because thats what he does

      Delete
    6. Oh James, nothing prevents you posting on my blog, except your lack of a back bone.

      I know it's not fashionable to demand pesky ole prove from a FORS poster, but I will not allow your bullshit to go unchallenged, and as we clearly know, that's why you don;t have the balls to post a challenge to thye posts on my blog.

      I look forward to you growing a backbone James.

      Delete
  11. Barry,

    If this is true and he was not there then I have been misinformed elsewhere and I apologise to Chris Smee.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John I will pass that on. He doesnt have a blogger account (he uses twitter) and he acts as an independent reporter passing stories on to the newspapers and the BBC which is why you do not see his byline on stories.

      Delete
    2. Barry,

      I think the term used to be a 'stringer' for the nationals.

      Delete
    3. Yet still not a sign of a link to, nor evidence of any of Smee's literary masterpieces. He's just a common fiction writer, and from his performance thus far, a not very impressive one.

      Delete
    4. As the hamster promotes censorship (just like all left wing dictatorships) on his BS blog it is impossible to post. He has yet to post on my blog despite being given every chance.
      All he has to do is refute what I have posted, he doesn't even make an effort to do this on his own BS blog.

      Delete
  12. Barry your 9:11 pm,

    I do not think there is anything that you can do. But does it much matter to you anyway? You have your own blog, this one and others. If you pause to think about it, blogging is not that important. It is in the main just talk and opinion, often on the work of others. The fault with blogs and especially Facebook is that they encourage people to wear their heart on their sleeve and to tell all to all. This will not necessarily advance your purpose. You research is carried out elsewhere. Should you find the smoking gun then your first port of call will not be a blog or facebook.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Do you know that there is a bucket of Dunkirk sand in that church ?

    Anyone going to the TDC Truth and Reconciliation gig on the subject of TDC Probity and Reputation ?

    Imagine JH there with his fingers in his ears and his eyes squeezed shut chuntering away "No proof no proof no proof no proof I'm cutting through bullshit y'know".

    And another voice "When I was a senior civil servant putting up scaffolding at number ten and assuring myself I knew more about everything than a rational person would be of anything not to mention my sterling service at RAF Much Binding"

    And a kindly inquiry from a non-blogger "You do know you are the same person both of you now which one requires a tissue ?"

    "Proof proof proof"

    Anyone actually fought an issue by the way ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Certainly not you, sunshine. You are just what is somebody else going to do about everything. No proof, no idea, no hope in your case.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for such an erudite and prompt response. Perhaps Peter C will be at the Probity and Reputation gig. His little box brownie in hand.

      Who exactly has fought issues for Thanet ? ECR ? Fact is he prizes his anonymity way above actually fighting a cause. Michael ? Do you think ? Questioning the council, publishing and acting as a platform for the rhetoric of JH and Co is the very antithesis of fighting a cause.

      Ian Driver ? The newly Green cllr who won't even question direct water abstraction health implications in his own ward. Who certainly won't touch any Thanet issue in which the IRA supportive nature of his former SWP existense is likely to be aired.

      There is one aquifer contamination hero who was easily threatened into silence by a TDC tory cllr. All the sound and none of the fury. He's a friend of Michael so stand by for the moderating hand to quickly step in as Michael finds the truth uncomfortable.

      And the truth is that the facade of public interest blogging has eroded like a Thanet chalk face. Revealing simply the rant indulgences of sad old geezers who will ever be always on the touchline never on the pitch.

      Best wishes "Sunshine"

      Delete
    3. "Who exactly has fought issues for Thanet ?"

      Don't keep us in suspense then, tell us!

      Delete
    4. Peter Checksfield & Anon 9:22 am

      You do realise don't you that you are rising to the bait of the Manston Aquifer Man. I thought that is was common agreement for us to ignore him in the forlorn hope that he will go way.

      Delete
    5. Farnie BarnardJuly 06, 2013 3:48 pm

      John, he may not go away but the policy of ignoring him is eating him up. He is back to talking to himself and trying to provoke others by name, you in particular, to rise to the bait. Love the way that even ECR, Michael and Ian Driver are now included in his enemies.

      Delete
    6. Farnie,

      Yes, you're right. He has adopted a scattergun approach firing off in all directions in the hope of flushing out a target, which is what I expected him to do. Added to this, he also enjoys insulting people. In my view it is unlikely that he will ever go away. He's having too much fun for that.

      Delete
    7. Farnie BarnardJuly 06, 2013 9:10 pm

      Not as much fun as he did when he provoked people into responding or reacting to his various claims. Better just ignored.

      Delete
  14. Anonymity John. I have fought many issues and I have a good track record of "Winning". But I am now loathe to be identifiable on blogs. If you, for example, look at Facebook. There are countless "Justice for ....." pages. People wanting to relate and promote their own individual cause. Nearly always they will present their cause as being a fight for justice for all. They will feel that they have been silenced because they would otherwise expose corruption in high places and so on. Many many of these are genuine cases in which the individual has rationalized entirely the wrong explanation.


    What happens is that if you have a record of fighting and winning you will receive messages from such causes asking for help. Emails with myriads of attachments.

    In one case I helped. It happened to be a Thanet case. What happens next is that, in spite of being told to keep it confidential, the Thanet man passes your phone number on. Then you get phone calls from others. And more and more.

    In one such case I did help and it involved phoning CPS. CPS had to urgently contact Kent Police officers to point out deadlines for documents to be with CPS or they would be inadmissible. I prepared such documents for the Thanetian. And I told them that Kent Police will be on your doorstep not long after the CPS has roasted their backsides. Don't let them now prepare the statement. Use the documents I have prepared.

    Then you hear NOTHING. So you phone and the Thanetian answers as if he had somehow forgotten. "Oh yeah the police came out and explained everything like so they prepared a new statement and I signed it all sorted didn't want trouble". And that will happen time after time after time if you fight for Thanetians. They will always always renege.

    You change your phone number, cancel your Facebook account and never use your identity again.

    When I was on Facebook for a while I got messages from people having trouble with PSNI and others with Suffolk Plod and others with ATOS and others with Greater Manchester Plod and others with Met Plod and others with NHS. It just never ends. There were people who had slagged me off on blogs nonetheless messaging me privately asking for help ! One even said sorry for dissing you on blog but can you help me with this trouble.

    What you do JH is seek the comfort of the imaginary group when you don't have an answer. The old conciliatory "I thought we agreed" line of the morally inferior. Sorry chum but you ain't a fighter. Anyone who seeks comfort from the throng lacks the fibre.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Richard Card by any other name!

      Delete
  15. Isn't that the chap who recently won a case review by Attorney General ?

    What have the JH's achieved lately ? Any Submissions to public inquiries ? Judicial Reviews of authority (such as deploying Wednesbury Unreasonableness) ? reporting by invitation to Government Ministers ? bringing about changes to legislation and regulation ? FOIs ? What none of the foregoing ? So what exactly is that you do again Thanet bloggerati? Oh I see you moan rather a lot and try to mock how the strong man stumbles.

    Throbbers.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You really are a laugh a minute, Richard, a case review, well I never. Somehow it must have escaped the notice of the news media. I wonder why?

      Delete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.