Stevo985 Posted November 19, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 19, 2012 I love this bit Fatso has taken offence to this Just imagine the crocodile "What on Earth do you think you're doing?!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 "Salclearing in the woodser crocodile"... good work, word filter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 "Salclearing in the woodser crocodile"... good work, word filter. :clap: Good job it didn't happen in Sword removedhorpe. *giggles* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zak Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 :clap: Good job it didn't happen in Sword removedhorpe. *giggles* I guess i must be exceptionally slow this monday morning, I was thinking what an odd name for a type of crocodile 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Speaking of which, this guy does political pictures made from collages of cocks, arses and species of crocodile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 A drunk man who climbed into a crocodile enclosure in Australia and attempted to ride a 5m (16ft) long crocodile has survived his encounter. The crocodile, called Fatso, bit the 36-year-old man's leg, tearing chunks of flesh from him as he straddled the reptile. He received surgery to serious wounds to his leg and is recovering in hospital, police say. He had been chucked out of a pub in the town of Broome for being too drunk. The man, Michael Newman, climbed over a fence and tried to sit on the 800kg (1,800lb) salclearing in the woodser crocodile. "Fatso has taken offence to this and has spun around and bit this man on the right leg," Sgt Roger Haynes of Broome police told journalists. "The crocodile has let him go and he's been able to scale the fence again and leave the wildlife park." it all most defies belief ... I mean how drunk would you have to be to get kicked out of a pub in Australia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Drunk enough to assume an 800kg crocodile wouldn't mind taking visitors in the wee small hours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted November 21, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 21, 2012 You would think an Australian crocodile would be used to things like this by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 road in China has been built around a house after 2 residents wouldn't move .. I'm a little surprised as the Chinese government aren't exactly renowned for the adherence to rights of citizens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 23, 2012 That's a Chinese version of the farm in the middle of the M62 (no arguing with a stubborn Yorkshireman): 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 That's a Chinese version of the farm in the middle of the M62 (no arguing with a stubborn Yorkshireman): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 That's a Chinese version of the farm in the middle of the M62 (no arguing with a stubborn Yorkshireman): The refusal to sell the farm is a myth I believe. The road was split due to geological reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingsombrero Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 I'm calling bullshit on this UKIP foster parent story right now, there is more going on there that has either not yet been disclosed or just not been presented as it would damage the marketability of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 It's was an emergency placement so would have ended shortly after anyway. The decision seems to have been taken following a complaint by the children's birth parents (non white) about the fact the foster carers were ukip members and anti immigration. Personally I think fair enough. Social workers do a Shit job and are always "wrong". This should be about the suitability of the placement for the kids not about the sensitivities of the foster carers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 It's was an emergency placement so would have ended shortly after anyway. The decision seems to have been taken following a complaint by the children's birth parents (non white) about the fact the foster carers were ukip members and anti immigration. Personally I think fair enough. Social workers do a Shit job and are always "wrong". This should be about the suitability of the placement for the kids not about the sensitivities of the foster carers. The fact that Ed Miliband is calling for an urgent inquiry (now granted) suggests even he realises how utterly retarded Rotherham Council are being. Membership of which other mainstream political parties are on Rotherham Council's prescribed list for foster parents? The idea that being UKIP members makes them unsuitable to be foster carers of non-white children is basically political persecution. Being opposed to open door immigration doesn't equal racism, and the fact some blubbering tart from social services swallows that idea whole just shows how successful Labour's propaganda has been over the last decade in making those issues indivisible in the minds of left wing drones. Joyce Thacker, Strategic Director of Children and Young People's Services at Rotherham Council said, "UKIP want to outlaw multiculturalism". That is statement of such glaring stupidity that she should be sacked from her post simply for being thick as ****. No one that dumb should be making decisions for hundreds of foster children. If this gets anywhere near a courtroom I'd suggest Ms Thacker will be in very hot water indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 24, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 24, 2012 The fact that Ed Miliband is calling for an urgent inquiry (now granted) suggests even he realises how utterly retarded Rotherham Council are being. Membership of which other mainstream political parties are on Rotherham Council's prescribed list for foster parents? The idea that being UKIP members makes them unsuitable to be foster carers of non-white children is basically political persecution. Being opposed to open door immigration doesn't equal racism, and the fact some blubbering tart from social services swallows that idea whole just shows how successful Labour's propaganda has been over the last decade in making those issues indivisible in the minds of left wing drones. Joyce Thacker, Strategic Director of Children and Young People's Services at Rotherham Council said, "UKIP want to outlaw multiculturalism". That is statement of such glaring stupidity that she should be sacked from her post simply for being thick as ****. No one that dumb should be making decisions for hundreds of foster children. If this gets anywhere near a courtroom I'd suggest Ms Thacker will be in very hot water indeed. As usual, the story is focused in completely the wrong place. This story is about children being fostered on a very short term basis, which is usually done because of some family emergency at home and not because the parents are unfit to be parents. It is therefore only right that those parents have some sort of say in the type of family their children are being cared for it being as it is fairly safe to assume that they will be re-united at some point in the not too distant future. For all we know, the two parents could be hospitalised and there is no other family support mechanism to look after the children. If the parents of the children object to where they are being fostered is that really such a bad thing? The quotes from Joyce Thacker are a little naive but they aren't, as if often the case in stories like this, the actual story here. The story is that two parents were unable to look after their own children temporarily, those children were then fostered to people the parents considered inappropriate, social services then acted upon this. It's what they are meant to do. It doesn't matter whether you or I think the parents opinion is incorrect or misguided, its their opinion and it is the one that counts. So the story here is... socail services did their job, as they are supposed to do but that doesn't really get many headlines. The story that is being reported here is Foster parents, the media and a political party try to make political mileage using some unfortunate kids circumstances as their bait. Its the story as its being reported that is morally dubious not the actions of the council. Any coincidence that there is a by-election in Rotherham next week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 Couldn't disagree more Social services have not done their job "properly" and to remove children from a couple based on their UKIP voting intent is bonkers Thacker deserves the sack , nothing less, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 Fair play, I say. Now all we need to do is add Coldplay listeners and sha fans to the list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 25, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 25, 2012 Couldn't disagree more Social services have not done their job "properly" and to remove children from a couple based on their UKIP voting intent is bonkers Thacker deserves the sack , nothing less, You're still reading the headlines Tony, these kids were only in very short term care (for reasons unknown). To keep the kids with this couple would have been going against the parents wishes. That is social services job, they'd have been sued to buggery by the parents if they hadn't removed the kids. An the foster parents have shown their true colours by attempting to make political mileage out of it during a by-election, that in itself makes them unsuitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 "Salclearing in the woodser crocodile"... good work, word filter. Brilliant! Let's try this - Scunthorpe United Rubbish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts