New Dogs Trust centre is well woof the wait

Southend Standard: The Dogs Trust centre, in Nevendon Road, Wickford The Dogs Trust centre, in Nevendon Road, Wickford

A £7.3MILLION state-of-the-art dog rehoming centre officially opened yesterday, after 15 years in the making.

More than 120 guests were invited to the centre, in Nevendon Road, Wickford, for a fun-filled day of celebrations.

Builders have spent the past 15- months constructing the site, which is complete with 69 glass fronted kennels, a rehabilitation centre, vet and surgical suite, hydrotherapy rooms, a training hall and grooming suite.

The plans date back to 1999, when the Dogs Trust first began looking for a suitable location for a new rehoming centre in Essex.

Clarissa Baldwin, chief executive of the Dogs Trust, said: “We are absolutely delighted to be finally opening Dogs Trust Essex.

“We have been searching for a suitable site in the county for over 15 years and today our dream has become a reality.”

The centre is set to care for 1,000 rescue dogs every year, adding to the 17,000 already looked after at the existing 19 Dogs Trust homes across the country.

Maria Wickes, manager of the newEssex rescue centre, added: “We have been overwhelmed by the support we have received from local people both in wanting to work for the charity, donating items, volunteering, raising funds and adopting rescue dogs. So, thank you everyone for your support.

“We hope to be able to care for a thousand dogs a year at Dogs Trust Essex, so the future is looking brighter for dogs in the region.”

The 14-acre site also includes exercise paddocks on both astroturf and sand.

Forty-one members of staff have been hired to take on a range of roles.

The official opening, attended by Mayor Mo Larkin and children from North Crescent Primary School, in Wickford, kicked off with a parade of rescue dogs.

Doors opened to the public this morning.

For more information, call 01268 535050 or visit www.dogstrust.org.uk

Comments (64)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:04pm Tue 3 Jun 14

CarnMountification says...

Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ? CarnMountification
  • Score: -9

3:07pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Chris Flunk says...

CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people. Chris Flunk
  • Score: -6

3:11pm Tue 3 Jun 14

w-jback says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place. w-jback
  • Score: -28

3:22pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Chris Flunk says...

w-jback wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.
I think you'll find that the dogs trust is a charity and people chose to contribute to it. So, do you think people's choice of charitable contributions should be restricted to what you deem worthy?

If you are going to use this argument, surely it's disgusting to spend money on shelter for the homeless in a world where there are starving children or people dying of controllable or treatable diseases. Just because something isn't top of your personal worthiness chart doesn't make it wrong. There's room to address more than one issue at a time.
[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that the dogs trust is a charity and people chose to contribute to it. So, do you think people's choice of charitable contributions should be restricted to what you deem worthy? If you are going to use this argument, surely it's disgusting to spend money on shelter for the homeless in a world where there are starving children or people dying of controllable or treatable diseases. Just because something isn't top of your personal worthiness chart doesn't make it wrong. There's room to address more than one issue at a time. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 52

3:24pm Tue 3 Jun 14

I care about rayleigh says...

w-jback wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.
The Dogs Trust is a charity to which lots of people donate money - they must think it's worthwhile to look after unwanted pets. If you want to discourage people from owning dogs, then bring back the licence fee.
[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]The Dogs Trust is a charity to which lots of people donate money - they must think it's worthwhile to look after unwanted pets. If you want to discourage people from owning dogs, then bring back the licence fee. I care about rayleigh
  • Score: 30

4:09pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Maddogg says...

Rather trust a dog than a human.
Rather trust a dog than a human. Maddogg
  • Score: 54

4:42pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Howard Cháse says...

Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.
Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology. Howard Cháse
  • Score: 33

4:52pm Tue 3 Jun 14

CarnMountification says...

w-jback wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.
Yes, why build plush homes for sh1tting barking animals, and let our fellow man to live in utter squalor
[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]Yes, why build plush homes for sh1tting barking animals, and let our fellow man to live in utter squalor CarnMountification
  • Score: -47

5:05pm Tue 3 Jun 14

black jack ketchum says...

Most people are quite capable of helping themselves, dogs sadly aren't! animal lovers donated to have this built & good for them, if you don't like it tough!
Most people are quite capable of helping themselves, dogs sadly aren't! animal lovers donated to have this built & good for them, if you don't like it tough! black jack ketchum
  • Score: 49

6:12pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Diddy25 says...

Brilliant! Have been waiting for you to open. Am hoping you run similar to Battersea?? As soon as my hols are over, I'll be there looking for my next (5th rescue) doggy. Can't wait.
Brilliant! Have been waiting for you to open. Am hoping you run similar to Battersea?? As soon as my hols are over, I'll be there looking for my next (5th rescue) doggy. Can't wait. Diddy25
  • Score: 29

6:20pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years? ThisYear
  • Score: -36

6:35pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 30

6:45pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?" ThisYear
  • Score: -17

7:11pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Howard Cháse says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is. Howard Cháse
  • Score: 11

7:28pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...

I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..

Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools' ThisYear
  • Score: -24

7:30pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Howard Cháse says...

ThisYear wrote:
Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...

I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..

Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'
Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford.

Haven't stopped laughing yet here.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here. Howard Cháse
  • Score: 12

7:35pm Tue 3 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...

I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..

Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'
Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford.

Haven't stopped laughing yet here.
No council of the year award, No MP status, No OBE etc, No council leadership, No council seat, No significant number voting for him, No more pie and gravy.

BUT he still has his massive head!

Where on earth (if thats the planet) does he buy his hats?
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]Poor old Tiny Balls though getting voted out by the folk of Wickford. Haven't stopped laughing yet here.[/p][/quote]No council of the year award, No MP status, No OBE etc, No council leadership, No council seat, No significant number voting for him, No more pie and gravy. BUT he still has his massive head! Where on earth (if thats the planet) does he buy his hats? ThisYear
  • Score: -4

9:04pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?
See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that? Devils Advocate
  • Score: 10

12:53am Wed 4 Jun 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer:

Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 16

5:51am Wed 4 Jun 14

Bangemup says...

Maddogg wrote:
Rather trust a dog than a human.
Just for the record I have been bitten by both !
[quote][p][bold]Maddogg[/bold] wrote: Rather trust a dog than a human.[/p][/quote]Just for the record I have been bitten by both ! Bangemup
  • Score: 5

5:51am Wed 4 Jun 14

Bangemup says...

Maddogg wrote:
Rather trust a dog than a human.
Just for the record I have been bitten by both !
[quote][p][bold]Maddogg[/bold] wrote: Rather trust a dog than a human.[/p][/quote]Just for the record I have been bitten by both ! Bangemup
  • Score: 3

9:20am Wed 4 Jun 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs? blackheart
  • Score: 19

5:05pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus.

Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 9

5:07pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

ThisYear wrote:
Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...

I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..

Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'
you have to bring travellers into everything don't you?

Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now.

You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name.

You are again in a minority.

Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered.

Otherwise pipe down.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 9

5:13pm Wed 4 Jun 14

pussycats says...

Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0) pussycats
  • Score: 1

5:19pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?
you still at it?

Do you know this person? Has she actually had any money from the public purse for her own ends? Has she got herself a Baroness title despite being a Socialist and does she collect £300 a day for attending the House of Lords? No? But we know someone who has don't we? Or do you?

Does she have a chauffeur driven limo paid for by you? Does she enjoy meals at your expense? Were her portrait and chain paid for by you?

Has she done you any harm?

Oh and she didn't open it actually. She attended it by INVITATION. As she does many events.

She does in fact spend a lot of her own money on prizes and events and raises millions for charity. Do you?

Much of what she does goes unreported but as soon as the twerps in the Labour group start stirring up a hate campaign, idiots listen to their caterwauling. Only very stupid people believe anything at all that comes out of the mouths of the bad losers and sour grapes of the Labour group.

Truth is, those who do most of the stirring are not exactly squeaky clean themselves.

Try looking at other politicians, particularly Labour. Look under the FoI, something "Cllr" Gavin Callaghan is fond of... although usually a waste of time and public money because he looks under all the wrong stones. The biggest waste of space and public money in Basildon is what he sees when he looks in a mirror.

Just loves victimising folk. But it's water off a duck's back to me. I couldn't care less. Just strengthens my resolve.

Thing is now Labour has been ground into the dirt by the voting public of Basildon they are going to get nastier and start stirring up more trouble for their opponents.

Watch this space.

Thing is, they are now history and need to accept it and move on.

Check out their election campaign and the methods they used to get people to vote (obviously a MASSIVE failure).

In short, if you want a politician to pick on, there is no shortage, especially the hypocrites of the Labour group who delight in highlighting others' supposed shortcomings whilst concealing their own.

If you want to know what they do, there are all sorts of correct channels to find out. But if you listen to the media and particularly ANYTHING that issues forth from the rabid cake hole of Callaghan, you might as well flush the toilet and listen to that for all the common sense you'll get.
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?[/p][/quote]you still at it? Do you know this person? Has she actually had any money from the public purse for her own ends? Has she got herself a Baroness title despite being a Socialist and does she collect £300 a day for attending the House of Lords? No? But we know someone who has don't we? Or do you? Does she have a chauffeur driven limo paid for by you? Does she enjoy meals at your expense? Were her portrait and chain paid for by you? Has she done you any harm? Oh and she didn't open it actually. She attended it by INVITATION. As she does many events. She does in fact spend a lot of her own money on prizes and events and raises millions for charity. Do you? Much of what she does goes unreported but as soon as the twerps in the Labour group start stirring up a hate campaign, idiots listen to their caterwauling. Only very stupid people believe anything at all that comes out of the mouths of the bad losers and sour grapes of the Labour group. Truth is, those who do most of the stirring are not exactly squeaky clean themselves. Try looking at other politicians, particularly Labour. Look under the FoI, something "Cllr" Gavin Callaghan is fond of... although usually a waste of time and public money because he looks under all the wrong stones. The biggest waste of space and public money in Basildon is what he sees when he looks in a mirror. Just loves victimising folk. But it's water off a duck's back to me. I couldn't care less. Just strengthens my resolve. Thing is now Labour has been ground into the dirt by the voting public of Basildon they are going to get nastier and start stirring up more trouble for their opponents. Watch this space. Thing is, they are now history and need to accept it and move on. Check out their election campaign and the methods they used to get people to vote (obviously a MASSIVE failure). In short, if you want a politician to pick on, there is no shortage, especially the hypocrites of the Labour group who delight in highlighting others' supposed shortcomings whilst concealing their own. If you want to know what they do, there are all sorts of correct channels to find out. But if you listen to the media and particularly ANYTHING that issues forth from the rabid cake hole of Callaghan, you might as well flush the toilet and listen to that for all the common sense you'll get. Kim Gandy
  • Score: -5

5:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

pussycats wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)
Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D

I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.
[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote: Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 1

5:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

LexyGirl says...

I adore all animals but to spend 7 million on this seems very excessive.
I adore all animals but to spend 7 million on this seems very excessive. LexyGirl
  • Score: 2

5:25pm Wed 4 Jun 14

LexyGirl says...

Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other? LexyGirl
  • Score: 6

5:28pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?
Oh and no meals were laid on, just nibbles which everyone partook of.

If you want to check out free meals for councillors at taxpayers' expense I suggest you go to County Hall and see who has been claiming freebies for years. Smoked salmon, roast pork, claret..

Very interesting.

Mo Larkin isn't one of them as she is not a county councillor, nor does she claim freebies at the Bas Centre or anywhere else. She buys her own food when on council duty.

Quite often politicians, when attending events, will be offered nibbles but that's about it. And it is usually the organisers, rather than the public, who pay. And generally everyone gets a sandwich or a piece of cake if the organisers have laid it on.

Mo Larkin holds charity balls where everyone including her, pays for their own meals. Nobody gets in gratis.

Just goes to show, you can't believe everything you read online. If you did you'd be as barmy as the rest.

No substitute for actually knowing and experiencing.

Have a good old scout around at councillors' expenses. They are published online.

Check out Lady Ange of Vange AKA "Baroness" Basildon, (former Basildon MP Angela Smith) and her £300 a day attendance fee at the House of Lords. This coming from a Socialist who didn't believe in hereditary peerages but was quite happy to accept one herself.

Now that really is worth looking at if you want to b1tch about politicians whose costs come out of your pocket.

Let's get it in perspective eh?
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: See Mo Larkin is still opening everything. I am going to open my pay packet Thursday. Do I have to lay a meal on if she attends that?[/p][/quote]Oh and no meals were laid on, just nibbles which everyone partook of. If you want to check out free meals for councillors at taxpayers' expense I suggest you go to County Hall and see who has been claiming freebies for years. Smoked salmon, roast pork, claret.. Very interesting. Mo Larkin isn't one of them as she is not a county councillor, nor does she claim freebies at the Bas Centre or anywhere else. She buys her own food when on council duty. Quite often politicians, when attending events, will be offered nibbles but that's about it. And it is usually the organisers, rather than the public, who pay. And generally everyone gets a sandwich or a piece of cake if the organisers have laid it on. Mo Larkin holds charity balls where everyone including her, pays for their own meals. Nobody gets in gratis. Just goes to show, you can't believe everything you read online. If you did you'd be as barmy as the rest. No substitute for actually knowing and experiencing. Have a good old scout around at councillors' expenses. They are published online. Check out Lady Ange of Vange AKA "Baroness" Basildon, (former Basildon MP Angela Smith) and her £300 a day attendance fee at the House of Lords. This coming from a Socialist who didn't believe in hereditary peerages but was quite happy to accept one herself. Now that really is worth looking at if you want to b1tch about politicians whose costs come out of your pocket. Let's get it in perspective eh? Kim Gandy
  • Score: -1

5:33pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

LexyGirl wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?
Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.

I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.

So much jealousy.

It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.

Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.

So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?
[quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote: Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others? Kim Gandy
  • Score: -1

5:50pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Abington86 says...

But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?
But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor? Abington86
  • Score: 4

5:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

LexyGirl says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
LexyGirl wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?
Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.

I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.

So much jealousy.

It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.

Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.

So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?
My people have been hated on for centuries, I ignore it, that's what you should do :)
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote: Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?[/p][/quote]My people have been hated on for centuries, I ignore it, that's what you should do :) LexyGirl
  • Score: 0

6:18pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Abington86 says...

Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity?

We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him?

Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension.

I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy.

Keep on topic.
Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic. Abington86
  • Score: 4

6:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do!
Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!
Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude! Devils Advocate
  • Score: 3

7:21pm Wed 4 Jun 14

bellabear1 says...

w-jback wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
CarnMountification wrote:
Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?
Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.
No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough.
We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.
Humans being homeless is normally due to their own doing whereas dogs are made homeless by humans and can't help themselves
[quote][p][bold]w-jback[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: Fantastic for the strays, will the homeless humans still be in the cardboard boxes ?[/p][/quote]Are you suggesting we shut homeless people away in kennels? Disgusting. They are still people.[/p][/quote]No I believe he is suggesting that it is shocking and backward to spend so much money on unwanted pets when unwanted humans are sleeping rough. We should not be building homing centres for animals but discouraging people from having the stinking things in the first place.[/p][/quote]Humans being homeless is normally due to their own doing whereas dogs are made homeless by humans and can't help themselves bellabear1
  • Score: 7

10:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer:

Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
You decide my question is a rhetorical question...and then continue as if that were a fact...but at least you corrected your mistake.

So the answer is Yes..the padding after the answer is irrelevant to the question...as well as being incorrect..seems like you may have to correct yourself again

It is not always worth seeking planning permission before etc etc..sometimes it is worth applying retrospectively...as many people and business' do.
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]I'm sorry, you rather clumsily phrased it as a rhetorical question. As it clearly wasn't, please let me re-phrase my answer: Yes. Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]You decide my question is a rhetorical question...and then continue as if that were a fact...but at least you corrected your mistake. So the answer is Yes..the padding after the answer is irrelevant to the question...as well as being incorrect..seems like you may have to correct yourself again It is not always worth seeking planning permission before etc etc..sometimes it is worth applying retrospectively...as many people and business' do. ThisYear
  • Score: -8

11:01pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?
Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.

What on earth is a "home creature"

What on earth is a "home dog"

Are you bonging out again?
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again? ThisYear
  • Score: -7

11:08pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus.

Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.
Oh goodness me...the extreme poster accused of being a extreme right winger calling other posters racist!

You feel if a question has implication to a culture that is racism?

Can you explain how and why? (listen for the slithering off the thread)

"And some of it isn't their own land"

What on earth are you rambling about?

Some of what isn't who's?

"There is a legal and an illegal site"

There isn't an illegal site...only a legal one, which would suggest it is you talking out of your...hat.

Who is the "theirs" you refer to?

You really dont have much connection with the real world do you Ga-Ga?
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Bringing your Dale Farm mates into it again I see. Racist. And some of it isn't their own land. Shows how much you know. There is a legal and an illegal site and not every bit of land they occupy is theirs. Ignoramus. Just dry up. Stop your caterwauling and bet back to your curtain twitching.[/p][/quote]Oh goodness me...the extreme poster accused of being a extreme right winger calling other posters racist! You feel if a question has implication to a culture that is racism? Can you explain how and why? (listen for the slithering off the thread) "And some of it isn't their own land" What on earth are you rambling about? Some of what isn't who's? "There is a legal and an illegal site" There isn't an illegal site...only a legal one, which would suggest it is you talking out of your...hat. Who is the "theirs" you refer to? You really dont have much connection with the real world do you Ga-Ga? ThisYear
  • Score: -8

11:49pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Kim Gandy says...

Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is...

1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else.
2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture.
3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character.
4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up.
5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is?
6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance.
7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters.
8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me.
9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience.
10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit.
11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have.
12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good.
13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk.
14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse.
15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents.
16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors.
17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this.
18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities.
19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference.
20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it.
21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't.
22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are.
23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club."

(It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".)

Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on.

Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms.

Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me.

You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body..

Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try.

And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out.

Happy researching!
Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching! Kim Gandy
  • Score: -6

11:51pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Howard Cháse wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.
The question was:

"Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"
Yes it is.
So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land...

I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such..

Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'
you have to bring travellers into everything don't you?

Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now.

You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name.

You are again in a minority.

Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered.

Otherwise pipe down.
How do you make mention of Dale farm without implicating the resident of said Farm?

"You are a pointless individual"

Oh the irony

" and have no right to an opinion"

And that sums you and your ideology up entirely doesn't it?

" NO KNOWLEDGE"

I have more knowledge of the subject matter than you ever would or could have..you being part of a despicable act against little children from the community on question doesn't make you an expert on said community.

"and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority"

Oh you muppet...here is a sample of your deranged inverted thinking...It is you who is in the minority by using you name..can you comprehend that simple fact?

I would rather live beside them on a piece of land that beside you in a flat above a drinking den.
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Just goes to show it's worth seeking planning permission BEFORE you attempt to re-purpose or build on green belt land then.[/p][/quote]The question was: "Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?"[/p][/quote]Yes it is.[/p][/quote]So a tory led council was happy to spend millions evicting people of their own land because they deemed it greenbelt..although that is still disputed..while allowing a dogs home to be built on undisputed greenbelt land... I think that says all that has to be said about the tories...they are very anti-human save for a very small percentage of such.. Those who contribute to their agenda, by voting for them, really are indeed 'useful fools' or more appropriately 'useful tools'[/p][/quote]you have to bring travellers into everything don't you? Nobody gives a monkey's what you think. You should know that by now. You are a pointless individual and have no right to an opinion because you base everything you say on NO KNOWLEDGE and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority. Give these people a home adjacent to - or inside - your own home if you're that bothered. Otherwise pipe down.[/p][/quote]How do you make mention of Dale farm without implicating the resident of said Farm? "You are a pointless individual" Oh the irony " and have no right to an opinion" And that sums you and your ideology up entirely doesn't it? " NO KNOWLEDGE" I have more knowledge of the subject matter than you ever would or could have..you being part of a despicable act against little children from the community on question doesn't make you an expert on said community. "and still do not post under your own name. You are again in a minority" Oh you muppet...here is a sample of your deranged inverted thinking...It is you who is in the minority by using you name..can you comprehend that simple fact? I would rather live beside them on a piece of land that beside you in a flat above a drinking den. ThisYear
  • Score: -6

11:53pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
pussycats wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)
Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D

I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.
"I'm quite sane actually"

Oh dear..
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote: Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Nice pun! Very well thought out... or did you not realise it was a pun? ;D I'm quite sane actually but some of these idiots need putting in their place. If they had a brain they'd be dangerous.[/p][/quote]"I'm quite sane actually" Oh dear.. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

11:58pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
LexyGirl wrote:
Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?
Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons.

I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate.

So much jealousy.

It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research.

Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms.

So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?
"Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is."

Why have so many org's and people from them accused you of what you say they have?

It can't be because of jealousy!

You are not much of a catch, not particularly pleasant looking, have no money, live above a drinking den, have a character and personality of a sewer rat and those are the things that could be deemed to be in your favour..
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LexyGirl[/bold] wrote: Why is there so much bickering with every single story? Why can't you all be civil to each other?[/p][/quote]Oh I am, till somebody presses the wrong buttons. I'm quite civilised in comparison, at least I don't swear and make false allegations about people. You should see what they say about me. So much hate. So much jealousy. It's just that I hate people who are ignorant and comment on things they have no knowledge of. If you are going to comment it should be based on experience or at least proper research. Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is. Of course none of it has any foundation in the truth but you see,, I post the truth under my own name, whilst others here post lies and BS under pseudonyms. So what it boils down to is who do you believe? Someone posting from knowledge and common sense or hatemongers stirring up rumours and telling lies about others?[/p][/quote]"Apparently I am ex BNP and EDL and have been ejected from just about every political party there is." Why have so many org's and people from them accused you of what you say they have? It can't be because of jealousy! You are not much of a catch, not particularly pleasant looking, have no money, live above a drinking den, have a character and personality of a sewer rat and those are the things that could be deemed to be in your favour.. ThisYear
  • Score: -7

11:59pm Wed 4 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Abington86 wrote:
But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?
Question like this she refuses to answer and even claims not to read posts that hold such questions..
[quote][p][bold]Abington86[/bold] wrote: But you were a councillor weren't you Ms Gandy? but where were you a councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?[/p][/quote]Question like this she refuses to answer and even claims not to read posts that hold such questions.. ThisYear
  • Score: -3

12:02am Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Abington86 wrote:
Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity?

We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him?

Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension.

I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy.

Keep on topic.
Yet a while back Gandy was slagging ' texting Mo' off as if her sanity depended on it.
[quote][p][bold]Abington86[/bold] wrote: Ms Gandy - how many millions has the Mayor raised for charity? We all know that the Mayor does not have a driver,especially since her loopy tunes partner who drove her around was outed a a serial fantasist. Did you know him? Also we all know that the Mayor does not claim expenses - you can hardly speak to the woman without her reminding you of that but she does claim her Allowances doesnt she. Her annual allowance for being a Councillor is more than the basic state old age pension. I doubt very much if the Mayor has appointed you as her spokesman so keep it shut Ms Gandy. Keep on topic.[/p][/quote]Yet a while back Gandy was slagging ' texting Mo' off as if her sanity depended on it. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

12:05am Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do!
Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude!
"As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL "

Can you give a link to this?

As for liking herself to Boudicca..perhaps she meant her chariot horse
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Kim, I admit to being a dyed in the wool supporter of the hard-working people of our country. I have close supporter of the Labour movement and unlike most of you people appreciate the fact that they were the same as the women in that they too had no vote until after the first world war. It is a viewpoint I share with all my antecedents. Voting for Labour was the way forward for those that were subject to this nations serfdom rules. I have always argued for a fair day's work for a fair days pay. I do not believe in casual Labour, this was the way the right-wing kept the people in servitude. Even the strongest of our unions, for instance the Dockworkers, had to suffer the indignity of the foreman's finger, passing over those who weren't subjective, picking only those that were of broken spirit for their days work.. But, like most of this country now, what the Sun says is gospel. The majority vote for Mr. Murdoch's form of truth. You too are as guilty as the press with your accusations of me "Sitting upon my sit upon, living on benefits. ~Unless you call my pension, which I paid for through all my working life, a benefit, Like your beloved Tories are now starting to do! Yes I do know where the Mayoral Car came from and for how long the Labour party would not allow the expense of the Mayor and all the trappings. I also looked at the Attendances Of our Mayor for the last couple of years, which I found speaks volumes. As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL if you say none of that is true, why is it all still out there under your name and photo's? And yes, I do know Mo Larkin. Although she won't remember me, I have sat chatting to her on quite a few occasions. But remember, it was not the right-wing you support that gave you your voice in this political world. It was the movement you hate body and soul. Please don't start on about health ans safety, for that too is steeped in the history, as I pointed out to you before, of maltreatment by the haves to further their greed at anybody's expense, even to taking workers lives for a few pence more! I am living proof of their savage attitude![/p][/quote]"As I have said elsewhere I have also read your supposed history, including your Boudicca bit, and the articles when you were in the EDL " Can you give a link to this? As for liking herself to Boudicca..perhaps she meant her chariot horse ThisYear
  • Score: -4

12:15am Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is...

1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else.
2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture.
3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character.
4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up.
5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is?
6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance.
7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters.
8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me.
9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience.
10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit.
11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have.
12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good.
13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk.
14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse.
15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents.
16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors.
17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this.
18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities.
19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference.
20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it.
21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't.
22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are.
23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club."

(It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".)

Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on.

Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms.

Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me.

You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body..

Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try.

And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out.

Happy researching!
So you only get to hear about the posts about/directed at you from associates..

Don't those who thumb up this strange woman's comment realise like they are encouraging her problems?

"I have worked for national and local newspapers "

Why dont they use you now?

"You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you"

You dont think the same can be said for you? (If you believe in all that bullshinery)

The people who fought in the wars did not do so to allow your brand of hate to replace the decency they helped establish in this country...
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: Cllr Cockroach... I have not refreshed this page for hours so I haven't read your tripe but my associates, when they'd stopped laughing - reported back to me something about you wanting to know stuff about me... so here it is... 1. Firstly, I do not have to justify myself to you or anybody else. 2. Despite the fact that you are supposedly a researcher for anti trolling MP John Rotheram, you are pretty poor at it if you cannot find out where or when I was a councillor. You are, however, ace at making up rubbish, making fictitious claims and convincing not very brilliant journalists of the nonsense you manufacture. 3. Unlike you I do not make claims I cannot back up. The fact that you have the research skills of a neurologically challlenged amoeba is your problem not mine. If you cannot find this information it says more about your skills as a researcher than it says about my character. 4. Unlike you, I am honest enough to post under my own name not pseudonyms so am hardly likely to make claims I cannot back up. 5. Who I support and who my friends are is none of your business. Neither is who I distribute leaflets for. And where and when I turn up is absolutely none of your business whatsoever. Whatever makes you think it is? 6. All attempts to bully and intimidate me will be met with defiance. 7. Your hate campaigns and character assassinations are now legendary and the only folk you are convincing is yourself and your dwindling number of supporters. 8. You are not fit for public office and when your seat comes up again I believe the people of PNW will show you the door. In no uncertain terms and if I have anything to do with it, they will know as much truth about you as you tell lies about me. 9. You are a pathetically bad loser with an attitude problem that you need to sort out. It got you annihilated two weeks ago so your "#winning" formula obviously fell flat on its face. (The astute people of Basildon can see through you). But you have learned nothing from the experience. 10. I gave you the opportunity twice face to face to put these things to me but on each occasion you bolted like a scared rabbit. 11. You have no evidence to back up any of your spurious claims about me or anybody else. Nor ever will have. 12. You are NOT a writer.. your attempts at being a "roving reporter" were scorned by the people of a certain coastal resort so your "undercover" status was very poorly disguised. Your skills in that field are on a par with your skills as a researcher. Zero. I have worked for national and local newspapers which is another FACT you would know if your research skills were anywhere near good. 13. Your Twitter page, believe it or not is largely ignored by myself and others but we often get feedback about it in conversation when we are having a **** good laugh at your expense. You are the subject of much ribald laughter and are viewed as a crackpot with some unhealthy obsessions about folk. 14. You wouldn't know truth, humility, respect, diligence nor any of the other qualities needed to be a public servant, if they jumped up and bit you on the @rse. 15. You have no concept of what people want because you spend most of your time wasting public money on pointless "investigations" and of course your endless rabid and vile Tweets - even in council meetings you are Tweeting instead of engaging in healthy debate and trying to improve life for your local residents. 16. The numerous Standards Board complaints against you even by members of your own party (who had to defect because of your atrocious behaviour) are testament to how universally disliked you are in the political community - by officers as well as councillors. 17. Your attitude to the general public is condescending, critical, bullying and belligerent. Feedback during the election confirmed this. 18. You will NEVER make a politician. You have none of the qualities. 19. All the ranting, raving, lying, gesticulating, bullying, hectoring and taunting in the world will make no difference. 20. You use the phrase "See how I've destroyed you" far too much. It will come back at you. You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you. I guarantee it. 21. Those who can, do. Those who merely lie and threaten, don't. 22. Oh and the silly name calling doesn't wash because most people don't share your view. And using names like that just makes you look the pr@t you really are. 23. Be careful where you plant your spies. Also be careful how you choose them. As Blackadder said, your spies have "about as much talent for disguise as a giraffe in dark glasses trying to get into a polar bears-only golf club." (It's called humour. I understand the likes of you don't get humour because it might "offend".) Now put up and shut up. You were ground into the dirt two weeks ago. The people of Basildon spelled it out to you loud and clear. The fascist far left of Labour is NOT wanted. Accept it and move on. Lastly, seventy years ago the people of this country were going through hell in order to preserve our freedoms. Millions lost their lives to preserve the freedom of speech of the people of this country that the likes of you try so hard to destroy. Some of those people were directly related to me and it is because of them - and my children - that I will continue to stand firm and fight my own little corner while ever there is breath in my body. And I certainly won't let a dictator like you stop me. You are not now, nor ever will be, fit to lick the boots of any of them. And I have more guts and courage in my little toe than you have in the whole of your body.. Now do yourself a favour and don't bother responding either on here or off because I have tied you in knots yet again. You don't have the eloquence. I don't even know why you try. And frankly, I have better things to do than read more of your rubbish. I have just found a new brand toilet descaler which I am itching to try out. Happy researching![/p][/quote]So you only get to hear about the posts about/directed at you from associates.. Don't those who thumb up this strange woman's comment realise like they are encouraging her problems? "I have worked for national and local newspapers " Why dont they use you now? "You have stirred up so much bad Karma it won't be long before what you have done to others will catch up with you" You dont think the same can be said for you? (If you believe in all that bullshinery) The people who fought in the wars did not do so to allow your brand of hate to replace the decency they helped establish in this country... ThisYear
  • Score: -2

12:52am Thu 5 Jun 14

pussycats says...

pussycats wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)
Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!
[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote: Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting! pussycats
  • Score: 8

8:43am Thu 5 Jun 14

Abington86 says...

Ms Gandy - how many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT,repeat NOT 'Councillor Cockroach.'

Why do you I think that I am him. It is no secret that I am not at all aligned with the Labour party in any way so please where is your EVIDENCE that I am a Labour councillor?

Just answer the question - where were you a Councillor and why are you no longer a councillor?

I think that you stood as Councillor for something called the English Democrats but secured only a handful of votes. Is this true?

How many millions has the Mayor Basildon raised for charity Ms Gandy. You have claimed that she has so where are the FACTS to back up this statement?
Ms Gandy - how many times do I have to tell you that I am NOT,repeat NOT 'Councillor Cockroach.' Why do you I think that I am him. It is no secret that I am not at all aligned with the Labour party in any way so please where is your EVIDENCE that I am a Labour councillor? Just answer the question - where were you a Councillor and why are you no longer a councillor? I think that you stood as Councillor for something called the English Democrats but secured only a handful of votes. Is this true? How many millions has the Mayor Basildon raised for charity Ms Gandy. You have claimed that she has so where are the FACTS to back up this statement? Abington86
  • Score: 4

8:48am Thu 5 Jun 14

wonga says...

Mo Larkin opens a dog centre.. How very apt. Expect she has her own kennel there.. with a gold gravy bowl.
Mo Larkin opens a dog centre.. How very apt. Expect she has her own kennel there.. with a gold gravy bowl. wonga
  • Score: 3

10:11am Thu 5 Jun 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?
Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.

What on earth is a "home creature"

What on earth is a "home dog"

Are you bonging out again?
Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.

You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.

You know what a rocket is, yes?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes? blackheart
  • Score: 3

1:28pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

pussycats wrote:
pussycats wrote:
Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)
Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting!
Sorry pussycats, I just couldn't resist. But you are right, that's why I always make my original about three editions long. Kim cannot concentrate that long so it does help in some strange way.
[quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pussycats[/bold] wrote: Think you're all barking mad on this site......apart from me, who has a little meow every now and then. :0)[/p][/quote]Why do you guys have to quote everything.? It is so unnecessary and so boring and puts people off from commenting![/p][/quote]Sorry pussycats, I just couldn't resist. But you are right, that's why I always make my original about three editions long. Kim cannot concentrate that long so it does help in some strange way. Devils Advocate
  • Score: 2

6:17pm Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?
Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.

What on earth is a "home creature"

What on earth is a "home dog"

Are you bonging out again?
Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.

You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.

You know what a rocket is, yes?
I think you could clearly make you posts more understandable (as you have now attempted to do)...most people are not on your rather weird wave length and so wouldn't know what a "home creature" is and rightly so, as such a thing doesn't exist..*note to you; must make waffle clearer.

" if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature"

But you didn't 'say' that did you?

Im sure the readers can see the back tracking you are making to slither out of what you were implying..

Ugly minded dripweed.
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?[/p][/quote]I think you could clearly make you posts more understandable (as you have now attempted to do)...most people are not on your rather weird wave length and so wouldn't know what a "home creature" is and rightly so, as such a thing doesn't exist..*note to you; must make waffle clearer. " if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature" But you didn't 'say' that did you? Im sure the readers can see the back tracking you are making to slither out of what you were implying.. Ugly minded dripweed. ThisYear
  • Score: -10

6:20pm Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?
Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?
Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense.

What on earth is a "home creature"

What on earth is a "home dog"

Are you bonging out again?
Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you.

You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science.

You know what a rocket is, yes?
BTW...I do know what a rocket is BUT lets see if you do, like to explain it to me?

(psst readers, lets see if I can get him to waste another half hour of his life sniping, because he cant really do what he wants to do...its illegal you know)
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Is this the kennels the council gave permission to be built on Green Belt land..a month after spending millions evicting people off their own land which was deemed Green belt, although it had been housing a scrap yard for over 20 years?[/p][/quote]Would you rather home creatures that run feral, are aggressive to passers by and leave their mess wherever they go, or would you rather home dogs?[/p][/quote]Rephrase your rather dim question as it makes no sense. What on earth is a "home creature" What on earth is a "home dog" Are you bonging out again?[/p][/quote]Good grief, I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you. You know what a home is, yes? (think of one of the 150 million trailers in the USA if it helps you...?). You know what a creature is, yes?. Well, if someone says home a creature they mean give a home to a creature, I don't know how else to explain it to you. Try to keep up, it isn't rocket science. You know what a rocket is, yes?[/p][/quote]BTW...I do know what a rocket is BUT lets see if you do, like to explain it to me? (psst readers, lets see if I can get him to waste another half hour of his life sniping, because he cant really do what he wants to do...its illegal you know) ThisYear
  • Score: -11

7:04pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

This year,
This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references.

http://edlnews.co.uk
/index.php/latest-ne
ws/latest-news/425-e
xposed-ukip-candidat
e-and-edl-supporter-
kim-gandy.
This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy. Devils Advocate
  • Score: -3

8:00pm Thu 5 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
This year,
This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references.

http://edlnews.co.uk

/index.php/latest-ne

ws/latest-news/425-e

xposed-ukip-candidat

e-and-edl-supporter-

kim-gandy.
Opened the link and was shocked!

Good lord! The woman is evil to the bone...If she is not busting out of her dress she is busting out with hatred and bile...one picture looks like her face has been superimposed atop a pair of bare buttocks...have a look and see for yourselves.
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: This year, This is where I started, but when you go there scroll down through the hate comments and pick up her picture with her temporary title. Then enter that and it will take you to the references. http://edlnews.co.uk /index.php/latest-ne ws/latest-news/425-e xposed-ukip-candidat e-and-edl-supporter- kim-gandy.[/p][/quote]Opened the link and was shocked! Good lord! The woman is evil to the bone...If she is not busting out of her dress she is busting out with hatred and bile...one picture looks like her face has been superimposed atop a pair of bare buttocks...have a look and see for yourselves. ThisYear
  • Score: -2

9:37am Fri 6 Jun 14

Ghallo says...

Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).
Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities). Ghallo
  • Score: 7

2:32pm Fri 6 Jun 14

wonga says...

It's well over due that the Echo barred Gandy from this site, preferably blocking her IP address. She ruins just about every thread with her vile raging diatribes.

Do the Echo not realise that she must put normal people off from commenting on here?

Come on Echo.. Please do something to put this tortured rabid animal out of her (and our) misery.. Block her IP
It's well over due that the Echo barred Gandy from this site, preferably blocking her IP address. She ruins just about every thread with her vile raging diatribes. Do the Echo not realise that she must put normal people off from commenting on here? Come on Echo.. Please do something to put this tortured rabid animal out of her (and our) misery.. Block her IP wonga
  • Score: 6

2:59pm Fri 6 Jun 14

jxr says...

Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story.
Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.
Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish. jxr
  • Score: 7

5:11pm Fri 6 Jun 14

LexyGirl says...

Please stop this bickering, it's not getting anyone anywhere so why bother?
Please stop this bickering, it's not getting anyone anywhere so why bother? LexyGirl
  • Score: 2

6:28pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

Ghallo wrote:
Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).
You make your point then you criticise the travellers. Do you not realise you are tarring yourself with your freshly prepared brush?
[quote][p][bold]Ghallo[/bold] wrote: Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).[/p][/quote]You make your point then you criticise the travellers. Do you not realise you are tarring yourself with your freshly prepared brush? Devils Advocate
  • Score: 3

6:34pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

Howard Cháse wrote:
Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.
Do you own or work for a solar panel company?
I'm being a little frivilous there, I think you are actually spot on. Just a little concerned that it has been stated that they will never pay back the initial cost. Years ago, when I worked for the C.E.G.B. we were working on energy recovery systems. Sadly, the instability of the plant we were recovering energy from made them cost ineffective. With all the dark days ahead, are you sure these will be worth the effort?
[quote][p][bold]Howard Cháse[/bold] wrote: Well done the Dogs Trust for having all those photovoltaic panels on the buildings and showing how new builds should all incorporate such technology.[/p][/quote]Do you own or work for a solar panel company? I'm being a little frivilous there, I think you are actually spot on. Just a little concerned that it has been stated that they will never pay back the initial cost. Years ago, when I worked for the C.E.G.B. we were working on energy recovery systems. Sadly, the instability of the plant we were recovering energy from made them cost ineffective. With all the dark days ahead, are you sure these will be worth the effort? Devils Advocate
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Fri 6 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Ghallo wrote:
Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post?
We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families.
What a lovely place.
For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).
Is there any comments asking people to be "sorry for the travellers"?

Perhaps you have been reading a different thread than the one you posted on.

Im sure many people have opinions of those who pick the welfare of animals over the welfare of people.

Would you rather washing facilities in the swimming pool be for dogs rather than humans? Your post doesn't really explain what you prefer in the way of that.
[quote][p][bold]Ghallo[/bold] wrote: Wow there are some boring, pointless & completely irrelevant comments on this post? We are proud owners of a new dog thanks to the opening of the dog trust alongside 45 other families. What a lovely place. For the comments about how we are supposed to feel sorry for the travellers who were evicted because they didn't have planning permission, I'd much rather well looked after dogs in the area than travellers leaving their razors in my local swimming pool (their local washing facilities).[/p][/quote]Is there any comments asking people to be "sorry for the travellers"? Perhaps you have been reading a different thread than the one you posted on. Im sure many people have opinions of those who pick the welfare of animals over the welfare of people. Would you rather washing facilities in the swimming pool be for dogs rather than humans? Your post doesn't really explain what you prefer in the way of that. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

6:47pm Fri 6 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

jxr wrote:
Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story.
Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.
There is a subtext to the story of how a 'dogs home' was allowed on undisputed greenbelt land while disputed greenbelt land was denied as a home to human beings..

The fact that "80%+" of the comments is as you say suggest the subtext is relevant to the issue.
[quote][p][bold]jxr[/bold] wrote: Wouldn't it be nice if certain posters on this site took their silly arguing elsewhere. This is a story about a charity opening a new facility, and yet 80%+ of the comments are just a load of b1tching and whinging with absolutely no relevance to the original story. Very off-putting to the normal Essex residents who just want to read a bit of local news. Very selfish.[/p][/quote]There is a subtext to the story of how a 'dogs home' was allowed on undisputed greenbelt land while disputed greenbelt land was denied as a home to human beings.. The fact that "80%+" of the comments is as you say suggest the subtext is relevant to the issue. ThisYear
  • Score: -5

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree