Saturday, 8 June 2013

Ramsgate Maritime Museum reopens and a ramble around the harbour area

It was good to see Ramsgate Maritime Museum open today, this summer’s opening times are every weekend 10.30am to 5pm until 20th July and then six days a week, closed Mondays until the third week in September.
Nothing seems to have changed with the museum, it is essentially the same as it was when it closed last year.
Dreamland Leisure Limited the company run by the Godden family have put in a licensing application to reopen the amusement arcade called Ramsgate Boulevard opposite the pavillion.  
This was to have been used as offices relating to the Royal Sands development on the adjacent Pleasurama site and it had been announced that the developer had bought the building from the Godden family.

Obviously this hasn’t happened although just what this is significant of in terms of the Pleasurama development is unclear.

What is good is that the building is going back into use, although I have my doubts about the viability of an amusement arcade there.


A sketch from the Belgian Café last night, not really sure what to make of it.
Then this rather strange picture that Google produced automatically from my phone.

I will probably ramble on here. 
Good to see two of the slipways in use
I gather there have been some problems with the 1970s hydraulic winch on No1 slipway. 

Here is the link to the rest of the photos https://plus.google.com/photos/103118335852639233427/albums/5887150329862124337?banner=pwa

106 comments:

  1. How do they define "mature minded"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. overheard comment from people down there "we will not have an over 18's section" so I suspect it will be entertainment rather than a gambling den.

      Delete
    2. I'm forced to reach the conclusion that John Hamilton is a very sad individual. Having spent an inordinate amount of time using his blog to slag off Ian Driver he now seems to have started on Barry James. As far as I'm aware the only thing Barry James has done to upset him is to point out a few inconvenient truths about the Pleasurama debacle. I would like to see John Hamilton banned from the blogs. You can't stop him posting anonymously unless you insist on poster registration but I can't see that it makes any difference because he isn't using his real name anyway.

      Delete
    3. Having said that, I know that Michael refuses to ban him.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 6:04 pm,

      Is there any particular reason why you hide behind the skirts of 'anonymous'?

      Delete
    5. Yes John, I don't want to be the next subject of his internet bullying campaigns!

      Delete
    6. John I suspect someone with 2 Google warning attached to his blog has upset a few people.

      Delete
    7. Some readers of this blog have contacted Google because they believe that this blog's content is objectionable. In general, Google does not review nor do we endorse the content of this or any blog. For more information about our content policies, please visit the Blogger Terms of Service.
      Don't see this on any other blogs

      Delete
    8. I did click on those two warnings and it relates to the content which is" Naked in Thanet" (I think I have got that right?). Quite Why JH wanted to attempt to repeat the same link twice is anybody's guess? No doubt we shall hear from the man himself shortly anyway?

      Delete
    9. Thanks for That Barry. I've had another look at John Hamilton's blog and there is indeed facility to complain. You click on "More" at the top of the page and it gives you the option of reporting abuse to Blogger. You can select from a list of content which breaches Blogger's terms and conditions. In my opinion Hamilton's blog is crude because he describes you as "a bit of a cock" and he is guilty of harassment. I have complained accordingly. Are the members of FORS aware that it is this easy to complain?

      Perhaps the thing I find most offensive is that Hamilton (or whoever he really is) runs around everyone else's blogs spewing his bile when his own blog is already devoted to this. He doesn't allow negative comments about his views to appear on his own blog. If he kept his nasty comments to his blog we could all ignore them but he insists on invading every available online space.

      Delete
    10. That warning on my Naked in Thanet blog has nothing to do with upsetting people; rather it just refers to the "over 18" content. Certainly I haven't done anything against Blogger's Terms of Service (unlike Facebook, Youtube, etc, they allow nudity).

      Delete
    11. Barry,

      Yes, but such complaints should be treated with caution. They often emanate from spite. I agree that some posters have a robust style of argument - so what. This is no reason to let their comments give one a fit of the vapours. After all, the Manston Aquifer Man is always having a go at me and I don't want him banned; though he does want me limited to one post a day. Everyone praises aloud the new found freedom of the internet, but they forget that this includes the freedom to be rude, insulted and offended.

      What was the old playground saying, "Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."

      Delete
    12. Furthermore, if I were going to complain then I hope that I would have the strength of character to use my real name.

      Delete
    13. "John Hamilton" doesn't use his real name either.

      Delete
    14. ah so that's what the warning was about. Now there was me thinking it was a warning not to read the blog.
      we shall have to see what people make of this blog http://pleasurama.blogspot.co.uk/

      Plenty of questions but sadly no answers.

      Delete
    15. Anonymous 8:33,

      So what if 'John Hamilton' does not use his real name, this does not excuse you for hiding behind the skirts of 'anonymous'.

      Delete
    16. I often get the impression that some people enjoy being offended and actively seek it out.

      Delete
    17. "I hope that I would have the strength of character to use my real name"

      "So what if 'John Hamilton' does not use his real name"

      Erm, ok.

      Delete
    18. anonymous 9:22 pm,

      Your point eludes me.

      Let me put my earlier point in simpler language, two wrongs don't make a right. Does that satisfy your, "Erm, OK"?

      Delete
    19. You defend "John Hamilton" when he says malicious things about people, yet you admonish those who complain about his behaviour. So you clearly have double standards, or at best are a little confused.

      Delete
    20. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    21. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    22. Anonymous 10:52 pm

      You are seeking to defend yourself for posting anonymously. In this you deliberately misconstrue my remarks. You hear what you want to hear apparently to massage your own preconceived notions.

      This discussion arose from the matter of making an anonymous formal complaint about a person to an authority that has the power to penalise the accused. It is in this context that my remarks should be read.

      I am not defending 'John Hamilton'. I was talking about me. I said that if I ever complained about a person then I hoped that I would have the strength of character to use my real name. I then insinuated that you were craven and chose to hide behind 'anonymous'. You countered this with the play ground excuse that 'John Hamilton' does not use his real name. To which I replied that two wrongs do not make a right.

      In the event and for what it is worth I have always used my real name.

      Whether you complain and accuse under your real name or not is a matter between you and your own self respect.

      Delete
    23. I wish to remain anonymous on here, however I have used my full name for my complaint to Blogger.

      Delete
    24. Anonymous 9:49 am,

      Thank you. I unconditionally withdraw my remark about your being craven.

      Delete
    25. Good morning Thanetians, I am always amused when it seems that I occupy so much of peoples conciousness. It also amuses me greatly that poor ole James wants me silenced because he can't defend what he posts, and I then get critisised for alledgedly not actually being me, (which of course I am, though I have of course been accused or being a Labour/Conservative/UKIP councilor) by a clown hiding behind an anonomous profile! Absolutely typical of the gutlessness of those who seek to complain about EVERY attempt to better Thanet.

      Just to clear up issue, simply looking through the member list of KCC, TDC or RTC you won;t find me there, I have no time nor disire to waste my time on people who whine incessantly at anything that any councillor ever does.

      So James, instead of whining, why not post some evidence for the very first time to back up you laughable inuendo? Oh and PS, canm you please produce a copy of the passport and ultility bill you have for the last person you sold a house to...

      Oh bless Anon 9:49 to take me to task, but you snivel in the background to teacher LOL LOL LOL and you wonder why nobody of any stature wants to be a councillor in Thanet! You couldn't make it up!

      Delete
    26. We don't want you silenced John. But your posts are dull and clog up the debate now that you can find no excuses for RAF Manston as was or the pollution. Stick to one post a day/per issue and maybe you'll post something of interest: the above post has over 10 of your comments. Otherwise stick to your own blog. The same goes for JH who is far more unpleasant.

      The Aquifer Man - accept no substitutes or pollution.

      Delete
    27. What's with 'we' - there is no 'we' for you are a lonely single issue fanatic.

      Still I remain impressed that you are able to count up to 10.

      NOTE to John Hamilton: There you are, you have been told. The Manston Aquifer Man demands that you limit your post to one a day for each topic.

      Delete
    28. No John, there's at least 2 of us. I posted only 3 of the above comments.

      Delete
    29. You say that there are more than two Aquifer Mans! Surely not, this cannot be. I shall have to go away and lie in a darkened room.

      Delete
    30. I know nothing about any aquifers apart from your obvious obsession with them John.

      Delete
    31. Yes, why the concern over the Manston aquifer John? If there is no pollution surely you would just disprove that rather than your insults about Aquifer Man etc?

      Delete
    32. To Anonymous 3:33 & 3:59, who are one and the same buffoon.

      I know you are so stupid that you sit on the TV and watch the sofa.

      Anyway, I'm busy at the moment. Can I come back and insult you later.




      Delete
    33. And John wonders why people think his posts tedious.

      Delete
    34. Hi John. I have noticed a number of similarities between yourself and the fictitious John Hamilton. You both have the same initials, you both agree on everything despite having views which are deeply unpopular and you are both habitually abusive. Could it be that you are one and the same? I think we should be told.

      Delete
    35. anonymouse 7:27,

      You have said this before and it did not make sense then. I fear that you are judging me by your own reptilian standards. I am me and no one else.

      Now, who are you? I believe I know. Can you please give me the contact details for your carer.

      Delete
    36. Where's the ficticious John Hamilton Anon 7:27, I have only seen me posting, and I assure you, I am real, and here, porting corrections to the various posters of BS that seem legion on FB and in the blogs...

      Delete
    37. I guess someone who is mature minded would not let a couple of slovenian ships registered in cyprus run up a bill of £3.4 million before asking for their money back. P & O took 6 weeks!!!! Hey ho i guess 2 years is abiding by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy rules ????

      Delete
  2. Re over 18s that means it's going to be 'amusements' rather than serious gambling with machines giving out big cash prizes. Rather like it was before. I still have my Millennium rubber which I won out of a grab machine there in 2007, complete with 59p price ticket still attached. It'll be worth 60p one day, you mark my words!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems that that is want a family would like on a day out anon 8:27. I don;t think they will ever darlen the door of the 3rd heritage centre that it seems some believe have a future in that part of Thanet.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 8:17 pm,

      What you have described is proper seaside fun as I too remember it as a child.

      To be honest I am not sure what is meant by a Cultural 'n' Heritage centre, nor how it would benefit the town. I would be interested to hear what the champions of such a centre would wish to see exhibited.

      I visited the millennium Dome in 2000. I can honestly say that I have never in my life seen such a boring, insipid and vacuous exhibition.

      Delete
    3. Hey John, it worked then. The millennium exhibition was meant to celebrate the dawn of a new millennia. You are from the last one, or more likely the one before so its not surprising you didn't get it.

      Delete
    4. John, was this when stick and ball was the latest craze in town, when oranges were given as Christmas presents, when children could leave home in mid June as long as they were back in time for tea in September?

      The world has moved, other things keep us occupied now. An amusement arcade has a short shelf life on a weekend away. We've already got a museum that nobody visits. There is hopefully the tunnels opening up down the road. A weather spoons is probably what it will be, but if I had the choice I'd flatten it - it's a piece of victorian vandalism plonked right in front of the Georgian terraces and shops behind it.

      Tdc would be obsessed with putting something in its place, and their imagination stretches to car parks, which is what it would end up as.

      If they had real imagination, they would turn it over to be converted and used by its second most common visitor over winos - skateboarders. An open air skatepark on the beach.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 2:19 pm,

      I know very well what the Millennium Exhibition was meant to celebrate. In my opinion and that of the press and even the organisers it failed. Read about it.

      On reflection I could see how the vacuity of it would have appealed to you. There was nothing there to stretch your mind or imagination. Not that you have much to stress in the first place.

      You purport to be of the modern right on generation, and are so stupid that you think E=mc squared is a rap star.

      More to the point, did you visit the Dome?

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 2:35 pm

      You have the writing style of an adolescent. So I should endeavour to treat you seriously.

      The answer to you first and rather silly paragraph is "No".

      What is the point that you a struggling to make? Other than you want a skate park. So tell the Council. I used to skate at the excellent indoor roller rink in Dreamland, which was one of the best in the country. I believe that Ramsgate once had an Ice Rink. Do you skate? What are these other things which you claim keep you occupied?

      Delete
    7. Dome, yes. I thought it was very new labour. Of its time. It's very old fashioned looking back, but at the time and when visiting I thought it captured a moment.

      I much prefer its use now.

      Delete
    8. Keeping me occupied today, keeping my children occupied. Hmm. Bit of everything really. That might include 'cultcha', that might include walks, that might include pizza express, that might include the cinema for some Disney, that might include fishing etc etc.

      I suppose a weather spoons would get visiting, but so would a community centre or project. I wouldn't have spent all day there, but I don't spend all day anywhere. But an empty box doesn't get visited, it just gets vandalised and skated on.

      I submit lots of direct ideas to the council, but they don't strike me as ideas sort of people. At least the ones making the suggestions, getting out there and saying something are trying John. You might not like it, but it shows a passion. What are you doing apart from throwing stones on here? Skating obviously, but what are you really doing to make a difference?

      Delete
    9. Anonymous 2:04 pm,

      You are piqued by the tone of my earlier post,

      I replied to you in the manner that I did in the light of your gratuitously rude opening paragraph in which you said,

      " John, was this when stick and ball was the latest craze in town, when oranges were given as Christmas presents, when children could leave home in mid June as long as they were back in time for tea in September?"

      You adopt a similar tone in the final paragraph of your latest post.

      If you speak to the Council in the same insolent manner than you should not be surprised that they ignore you.

      Delete
    10. That's not rude John, and I didn't have you down as a sensitive soul when it came to age, as only someone worrying about time ticking on could take offence from that line.

      I was merely suggesting that old seaside holidays, of which the amusements are a part of are a little old hat, and don't form the central part of holiday as they may in the past along with donkey rides, toffee apples, Punch and Judy, and the aforementioned stick and ball. If you think that's a slant at your age, get over it, Pops.

      (That last part was a joke, btw)

      iPads, laser quest, indoor soft play and the good old bucket and spade might make up a typical day by the seaside. Time ticks on. Things change. Amusements are amusing for increasingly shorter periods. I can imagine watching a bunch of teens try to break their bones on a seaside skate park as highly entertaining.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous 7:18 am,

      You say that you are not being rude and then go on to say, "get over it Pops" You are clearly lacking in self awareness.

      You read into my earlier comments only that which you imagined to hear in order to satisfy your own predilections, and you got it wrong.

      You should remind yourself that you are not a teenager, and that those skateboarders may well be laughing at you.



      Delete
    12. Thanks John. I was starting to like you.

      Delete
  3. PS, More than happy to entertain debate with intelligent people who can evidence claims they make. I have banned nobody from my blog at any time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt intelligent people would want to debate with you JHBS - nor that anyone reads your unpleasant blog.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 6:26 pm,

      Your remarks are mutually exclusive. If you do not read the blog then how do you conclude that it is unpleasant? Secondly, how do you know that no one reads the blog - do you presume to speak for everybody?

      Delete
    3. Mr Holyer having been subject to much abuse on here and on a certain blog and even offering to meet to debate the issues and been refused I doubt a debate is what he wants.
      I have said on more than one occasion posting documents to Michael's blog is not possible yet the same "broken record" tactic is used to state I have no facts.
      This is my name, I am on Companies House as a director all easy to check as is your internet footprint yet there is a persistence in saying I am involved in public sector housing. This "fact" has been mentioned more than once yet it is wrong. However I get accused of not posting facts.
      To insult someone once is nasty but to continue to do so without rhyme or reason over the extended timescale goes beyond being nasty.
      Further stated above he hasn't banned anyone difficult to verify but he certainly doesn't allow freedom to post something he accuses Ian Driver of doing.

      Delete
    4. Oh anon 6:26, don;t be bitter just because you don;t fit the criterior of potential debating partners. Perhaps get your carer to take part on your behalf ;)
      My readership figures are quite healthy thanks, but I suspect you aren't bright enough to understand the posts on my blog ;)

      Abuse James? I simply state the case using facts, something you are clearly unable to copy. not sure I said I wanted to debate anything with you, and obviously "debate with intelligent people who can evidence claims they make" clearly rules you out. You have yet to post a document, or proof of any wrongdoing anywhere James, mail them to me, I'll post them for you, or are you simply alluding to the documents that prove nothing on FORS?

      Where are these facts James? Why is someone involved in housing attacking (with no evidence) someone who seeks to build property in Thanet, now there is an entertaining question...

      An insult by defintion has to be false James. I posted ONLY true comments, and facts. Thus if you feel you've been insulted, it would appear that you DO in fact have some evidence to support your inuendo, POST IT James.

      Once again, nobody is banned from my blog, I have nothing to hide, nor am I afraid of anyone. I have institued post verification to simply stop a spammer spamming my blogsite. Grow some balls James, post on my site, post some evidence, your post will appear, along with the evidence you MUST have, surely it's not ALL BS you've posted somewhere, SURELY you have proof of SOME of it?

      Oh and while your doing that, perhaps you could confrim that you have copies of a utility bill and passport from whoever you last sold a house to...

      Delete
    5. So JH-BS seems to be a builder with an axe to grind on ensuring rampant and unregulated development: airports, hotels, apartment blocks, roads, supermarkets, housing estates. but that's exactly what Ezekiel etc were doing and nobody wanted.

      Which is why they tried fiddling around the consultations and permits and monitors and funds and resorting to secrecy and hten barefaced lies and now silence.

      JH-BS is of the past.

      Delete
    6. Mr Holyer it is strange that during a conversation with you someone buts in, especially someone who thinks old people should be hosed down by the unemployed because they smell of Wee. Very rude of them.
      Hopefully this intolerant will stop sometime soon, although I doubt it.
      He even says send him the documents but doesn't provide an email address but confirms he can access the FORS Facebook page, how odd

      Delete
    7. Why don't FORS take down the remaining tattered Royal Sands banner and three signs? Pleasurama is cancelled and the destruction of Thanet complete.

      Delete
    8. It doesamuse me how you try to evade the clear and obvious fact that you have less evidence on pleasurama than there is to support a claim of a double decker on the moon.

      You can send mails and files to me on facebook right, shouldn't be a problem sending me some evidence now ay Jamez, i wait in amusement :-)

      Delete
    9. There is that butting in again

      Delete
    10. Where's the evidence James, try looking in the folder marked BS ;-)

      Delete
  4. How can you debate with JH? To my knowledge he has never made a contribution that wasn't an attack on somebody else and he responds to challenge with bullying and abuse. As for never banning anybody from his site, what a load of tosh. I have submitted numerous comments which he has not published and I doubt that I'm the only one.

    However, I'm a generous soul and I'm prepared to give JH another chance. I would like him to "debate" the Pleasurama fiasco with Ian Driver. I care not whether they use Ian's blog or John's blog but I would like to see JH live up to his claim that he is happy to debate with people who can evidence the claims they make. Personally, I will be looking to see if JH makes any claims at all and, if so, what evidence he produces. I will also be looking to see if he is capable of debating without resorting to abuse. However, I predict that he will duck the challenge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good idea 7:21 I presume you mean JH-BS. Because i would like JH to explain why he has a problem with the aquifer and/or the future of RAF Manston. As you say neither have any evidence beyond rude if not idiotic opinion.

      On a wider issue has anyone seen the flight regulations for the Manston Air Show? They seem to confirm the thing's safe by not including the towns, yet marking the villages as no-fly zones. Looks very dodgy.

      Delete
    2. Hello Duncan, sadly your posts do not get published on my blog, as you are nothing more than a spammer.

      I would happily humiliate Driver in a debate on my blogsite, all the poor lil lad has to do is grow some balls and post there. Other than that, you're opinion of me really is utterly irrelevant.

      Anon 9:12, Not sure if it's possible for me to care any less about the aquifer. Manston should be given free reign to develop in any way they see fit to make Manston "airport" a success.

      Delete
    3. Hi John. Sorry. Only just seen this. Must admit - bit busy at the mo what with everything. Its a shame my comments didnt get published because - as I said to you - if you take the "UKipper Hate" out of your thoughts, I think you have some good thoughts. As for a spammer - I like that :D New name for me. No John - I have just been leaving comments on your blog (which is now protected) imagining you - huddled over a computer - reading them. Not sure about Ian, but personally I would LOVE to have a live chat with you. Name the place and time and I will be there. Would love to do it face to face and film the results, but I suspect you like your privacy. You wouldnt want to come out from the shadows. So - as I said, pick a topic, place and time and I would love to have a chat with you. All the best - Duncan :D

      Delete
    4. Thank you for your invitation Duncan. I prefer the company quality people, not opportunist politicians, and amatuer acitivists who have nothing to offer beyond tragic and meaningless slogans. I choose my freinds and aquaintances very carefuly, using very high standards, and I can assure you, I wouldn't ever choose to lower them to unclude you as either ;)

      Your comments, deleted unread, they weren;t really worth the effort it would have taken to scroll down the page. Entertaining that you have been revealed as no more than an amatuer and out out date activist so quickly. Back to teh banner printing there's a good boy ;)

      Delete
    5. John is a coward who likes to hide behind his keyboard!!!

      Delete
    6. How can someone hiding behind their anonymous label accuse someone with a named account of hiding? Think it through, man, who is more cowardly.

      Delete
    7. I'm NOT a man, how very dare you!!!

      Delete
    8. Farnie BarnardJune 14, 2013 6:52 pm

      Strange, I never realised there were actually female cowards. Due apologies if you are one, madam.

      Delete
    9. Sorry for the delay in responding. Thanks for your comments John. Once again - revealing. I would suggest that - in an forum - including this one - your intellect would quickly be revealed. Lets face it "John" - your level of argument is not that high. Perhaps you could align to the EDL - they would probably think you are a genius. Must admit - I loved some of your comments. Duncan Smithson - "opportunist politician, amateur activist" using meaningless slogans since 2013.I like that :D funny. Now to change tone.

      John. You stand there and challenge me - in public. I respond with an invite. Your response shows what a spineless bully you are. I also found the notion of linking you with friends an interesting one. Got many John? Or do you find you have friends and then fall out with them - it always being their fault. Is that a pattern John?

      I stated it before, and I will state it again. Reveal yourself John. Lets me an you go toe to toe. I think it would be fun. Because I am quite competitive. And I like to win.

      Over to you....bet you cant respond without showing your bitterness and anger.

      Delete
    10. And after reading comments, I will extend that invitation to Farnie as well. Love a chat me. Love to expose hypocrisy wherever it is - at TDC or on blog sites. Happy to win :D And John - keep yer eyes peeled on the nationals. You will hear my voice there soon. Will try to name tag you in any article to give you a bit more coverage. Sound fun eh?? Does to me. But as I said, I like to win. Farnie - comment if you want to play as well - will take on all comers lol. All at once or one at a time. Toe to toe, face to face, keyboard to keyboard. Happy to do it in whatever environment you want. Think you know John - I run www.facebook.com/InTouchWithThanet. Lets do a live interview eh? I think it would be great fun. Have a lovely day

      Delete
  5. Anonymous 9:12 am

    You're off again, now you are against the Manston Air Show. Can you please seek other ways to excite yourself, other than carping on and lashing out. You do not hesitate to speak your mind because you have nothing to lose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come along JH let's hear your views on the Manston Air Show with the aquifer underneath. The fly routes do sound dodgy from above.

      JH-BS I think proves beyond the pale with "Manston doing anything it likes" although to be fair it has and still failed.

      So JH an Air Show on the aquifer? Good for business? Minimal pollution? No danger to the water supply or public?

      I am the Aquifer Man - accept no substitutes or pollution.

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse 12:41 PM

      And so you rant on and on - people around you are at risk from passive stupidity.

      Delete
    3. And so JH waddles away to join the queue for the cancer ward with naught but a dull insult tossed behind him. I think we can guess the foolishness of the Manston Aquifer and the Air Show. But who is in charge of the cleanup at KCC and TDC? Surely the councillors and civil servants have this as a top priority to minimise the cancer damage?

      I am the Aquifer Man - accept no substitutes or pollution

      Delete
    4. Airshow, a fine plan, work allowing, i'll be there.. Might even engage in some nutter spotting if the anon alliance shuffle in.

      Delete
  6. With havin so much content do you ever run into
    any issues of plagorism or copyright infringement? My website has a lot of unique content I've either written myself or outsourced but it looks like a lot of it is popping it up all over the internet without my authorization. Do you know any solutions to help prevent content from being ripped off? I'd genuinely appreciate it.


    Here is my web page chandler attorney

    ReplyDelete
  7. JH master of the Strawman fallacy, the begging the question fallacy and the ad hominem fallacy.

    Don't feed the troll.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right 4:35 the two JH's are every minor amusement now. They're opinions have been dredged and their humour aired. Best ignore them from now on. A couple of sad pensioners filling their day blogging methinks.

      Delete
    2. Farnie BarnardJune 11, 2013 7:38 pm

      Anon, from the timing and frequency of your comments, methinks you are but a sad old pensioner yourself, living in fear of cancer, bugged by aircraft noise disturbing your naps and generally filled with spite towards your fellow man. Why don't you try and make peace with your maker, before it is too late, and get some tranquility in your life for whatever time you have left.

      Delete
  8. "A couple of sad pensioners filling their day blogging methinks."

    Are you sure there are two of them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, at least two!

      Delete
    2. Anonymous

      This chain of anonymous posts shows that you are having a conversation with yourself - again.

      I'd like to leave you with one thought, but I'm not sure you have anywhere to put it.

      Delete
    3. it is a shame Mr Holyer but at least your wit is humorous unlike the other "broken record" blogger

      Delete
    4. Oh James, u whine and whinge, but yet again you post not a shred of evidence, nor anything worth reading, just anither day for poor sad lil James.

      Delete
  9. Michael seems happy to have these retards driving everyone away.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes 11.44 but Michael, a blogger who purports to be aware of potential defamation, seems happy to host not only the comments but also a link to JH's site. A site on which he often refers to a disabled person as a "Monkey".

    IF the question of "Being concerned together" were to arise then the Peterborough Football Club and shares in Swiss banks might become relevant to Thanet issues.

    What Barry James has evidence for is Insufficiency of Inquiry by Thanet Council. The Proceeds of Crime Act, and council compliance guidelines, are a measure of that lack of due diligence.

    Michael's well fought concerns about the size and safety of the site, and his history of being right, are also a measure of TDC lack of due diligence in administering planning law.

    In the world of the JH's of this world there are good guys and there are bad guys. And if necessary they represent a good guy as a bad guy (Strawman argument cracked record "No evidence" blah blah). The simplification of the simpleton who is convinced of his own rationality. Fallacy upon fallacy spews forth. When this is pointed out inevitably "Occutard" features in his irrelevant response.

    Many years ago a cllr was asked to stop attending as a "Helper" at a local swimming club for the disabled. He had been told specifically not to take an athetoid spastic out of his depth as the condition creates negative buoyancy. Yet the cllr blatantly used a mat float to take the disabled chap to the deep end. At the deep end the chap lost grip of the float. Another helper dived in and pulled the disabled man on to the float then towed the float back to the shallow end. Whilst the cllr was trying to use lifesaving stroke to keep the float at the deep end.

    All the while this cllr was aping the involuntary facial spasms of the disabled man.

    And when asked why he had done this the response was the "Monkey and mong" invective that seems to so characterize the bile of John Hamilton.

    The cllr learned on that occasion that the rescuing helper, Richie, was one hell of a lot stronger than him. To Richie, a powerlifting champion, the cllr was the weakling.

    Whilst we were dismayed at the tory's actions, how we laughed at his prompt commupance.

    Pity JH (George ?) and his ilk. But ignore them. Don't feed the trolls.







    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What was that load of utter garbage other than a good way to kill off a comment thread. Now we have Tory councillors alledgedly seeking to drown the disabled. Like they say, you couldn't make it up, but the usual suspect just has yet again.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 8:42 am,

      I should be grateful if you could let me know the source of your account of the swimming pool incident.

      What you describe is terrible. Was the Councillor prosecuted?

      Were can I find out more?

      Delete
    3. Just ignore Holyer and JHBS and they'll eventually go away. They're both just airing their egos now. Just irrelevant pensioners.

      Delete
    4. Nope, anonymouse 9:57 am, I'm still here and will remain so for so long as there are inadequates like you around to amuse me. However, I will not enter a battle of wits with you - I will not fight an unarmed person.

      If you are the anonymous at 8:42am, which I doubt bearing in mind that it contains some long words and no pictures, but if you are then can you please provide the source for your account of the swimming pool incident?

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 10:58 am,

      I realise that you are ignored. That's sad, I know. But you are ignored because you are the kind of man one would use as a blueprint to build an idiot. But I still talk to you because you are living proof that man can live without a brain.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 2:38pm,

      Clearly you misunderstand the meaning of the word 'ignored'. It is not some word to use as an epithet against those that upset you. If you tell a person that you are ignoring them then by definition you are not ignoring them. Though I expect you found your use of the word worked well in the playground. Rather like blocking your ears and going, lah lah lah. Do you still do that.

      Delete
    7. Anon 9:19 seems to have hit the nail on the head nicely, the only edit iwould make is to point out it's a load of laugjably inaccurate garbage :-)

      Delete
  11. Havent read previous comments - sorry. Just wanted to jump in and say - thank you!!! That was a brilliant little virtual walk and I loved the google bit!!! technology is great. and also had a couple of lolz moments at your wry recollections :D great work in my book :D

    ReplyDelete
  12. Duncan,

    Help me out, what is meant by the term 'lolz' moments? I have never come across it before, though I do recognise 'LOL' Is lolz something similar?.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's plural.

      Delete
    2. Duncan,

      I see, its 'laugh out loudz'. Interesting - can you tell me of any other words in English that form the plural by adding a 'Z' rather than an 's'? I suppose you were writing phonetically in text speak, but 4COL how does the single letter plural 'z' improve on the single letter 's'? alol :puff:

      Delete
    3. It's old skool.

      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.