Humphrey Bear

The article calls him a 'sixty-six year old'.

When I was in my early twenties, living and working in Soho, he opened his first Virgin Records shop - that must have been in the 1960s or very early 70s. Say 50 years ago. So he opened his own business at age 16?? I worked for Taylor Woodrow (was Britain's biggest construction company) and Frank Taylor was not allowed by law to open a company at age 16. Laws may have changed, but I cannot see that a sixteen year old would be able to do business in the London of those days.

The AFD are the Euro-sceptic party, are they not?

On 7/29/2016 at 9:21 AM, kingstonkid said:

I think that it like Bangkok is already zoned. The only thing that I would add is that hotels have a tourism package that tells families areas that they should not take their kids.

There are always going to be these areas.

The big difference now is that people on both sides have forgotten about common sense.

You are talking about this as if it is a face-to-face discussion. It is not. It derives from an on-line poll and thus has no basis in common sense.

I have seldom seen family groups in Soi 6, it is obvious that the merchandise available in this street is specialised. Would one take one's family around a car showroom unless one was considering buying a car? Or into a hairdressers unless someone needed a trim?

Regrettably Soi 6 has changed much in character since the 90s, when it was having with daytime entertainment for those who took their breakfast late and liquid. I look back fondly to the times when half-a-dozen of us would be sitting around, drinking our breakfast and the girls would all be giving<deleted>. Whatever happened to Nice-on-Ice and so on?

Looking at p5 of the letter,it seems that those Britons amongst us with still-foreign (e.g. Thai) wives will lose our current freedom of movement within Europe. The frightening text is

We also need to crack down on the abuse of free movement, an issue on which I have found wide support in my discussions with colleagues. This includes tougher and longer re-entry bans for fraudsters and people who collude in sham marriages. It means addressing the fact that it is easier for an EU citizen to bring a non-EU spouse than it is for a British citizen to do the same.

Scenario:

• Thai wife settles in UK (currently takes 5 years)
• Move to Germany for work for three years. Wife loses UK ILR.
• Husband retires, and his income falls below the spouse visa settlement threshold.

They can no longer return to the UK to live; for all I know, the wife may even be expelled from Germany because their income is too low.

So what do you value more? Your 'freedom of movement' within Europe or keeping some kind of control over UK borders in order to prevent an unsustainable population growth? Although the unusual scenario you describe would indeed be unfortunate for a small minority of people, I suspect the vast majority of UK citizens would much prefer to sacrifice their freedom of movement within the EU.

I am not concerned with the vast majority of UK citizens in this instance, but my own Filipina partner and our daughter. They are in the Philippines whilst I am in the UK, trying to sell my house to emigrate to the RPI, as my retirement income is not sufficient to allow wife and daughter to immigrate here. Maybe if we are out of the EU the government will change the rules.

David Cameron cannot change the rules to enable us to bring in Australian doctors or Columbian nurses, but our doctors are welcomed in Oz and the US. On the other hand we have to allow in farm labourers from Poland, road sweepers from Croatia and support them when they can't find well-paid jobs in the UK. And Cameron cannot control our borders while we are in the EU - cannot allow our fishermen to earn a good living, while he cannot prevent Spanish fishermen from pillaging our traditional fishing areas - often illegally taking contraband catches.

Heres a far out thought. Imagine a crane standing in the middle of the square in a nice European city with a body hanging from a noose for all to see. Imagine pickup trucks filled with black turbaned men carrying AK-47's driving around trying to find people who are going against their version of Sharia Law. Imagine the ancient Churches of Europe blown up and replaced with Mosques. Imagine that women will have no education or standing in society any more in Europe. This is a worst case scenario I know, but it happened in places like Iran which was a very progressive country until it met extreme Islam. You may argue that not all Muslims are extreme and I agree. The problem is that the extreme ones make all the noise and the quiet majority sits back and lets it happen and are forced into voting the way of the nutters (for fear of reprisal). In a democratic society, all it takes is a majority vote to make the changes and the European population is dwindling while the immigrant populations are flourishing (look at the birth rates).

I worked in Iran before and during the early part of the revolution.

Iran was NOT progressive - some people were, but other than Teheran and the area around Khorramshah (the oil-fields) there was a population of Shia peasants who were quite deeply religious in their own way. This was not the same as the Saudi/Gulf State Arabs, after all the people are Persian, but still they were religious, went to Friday prayers, performed their daily prayers and so on. I had many discussions with students at Shiraz University - almost all were pro-Khomeini - anti-Shah. Did you ever watch the parades on Ashura - when the men would march through the streets flogging themselves with chains - all day? One does not see that in Sunni countries.

My daughter was telling me how bad the Shah was, and how to dress/conduct myself, long before the revolution - through our baby-sitter, who was one of the typical lower class women in Shiraz. Remember, Khomeini spent 15 years in exile, mostly in Iraq. But when he went to France and understood about mass-communication, he spent the next two years fomenting his revolutionary return, with the assistance of the French security forces. They wanted Iran's oil.

The Tawi-Tawi group of islands are very close to Indonesia - one of the closest points of contact between the Philippines and Indonesia.

There is another Tawi Tawi Island nearer to Mindanao, plus a town on Mindanao. These are both much more 'civilised', in that there are settled inhabitants and means of communication. The Tawi Tawi group to the West of these last two is very little settled, apart from indigenous tribes and fugitive rebel groups. (So you get shot or eaten if you land there ).

There are about twenty little islands, just a few acres each, and one large island. But all are covered in virtually impenetrable jungle.

From the information currently in the public domain, I would strongly suggest that someone planted a bomb on board while the plane was on the ground at Sharm Al Sheikh.

Second, less likely scenario, is an extra passenger with a bomb, or a bomb in someone's luggage.

Most unlikely that it was a SAM or AA missile, launchers for a 10,000m height are expensive and easily located.

So these people have reached a safe haven, where there are rules already in place for their welfare, the possibility of their being able to work (provided there is work available) and the financial arrangements between the UK and Cyprus are agreed.

The Palestinians are economic migrants and should be returned to their homeland, but the Syrians are eligible for asylum and should be treated as such - within the rules already in place. Other nationalities, if any, should be treated on a case-by-case basis.

But the source of this story is Xinhua Press Agency, a Chinese-owned agency. How is it that they seem to report more on this story than the British press?

This man has brought this problem onto his own head.

Allegedly he has lived/worked in Saudi for 25 years so he should know what the "rules" are.

The Saudis are remarkably tolerant of Western lifestyles as long as it is kept within the gated compounds where most expats live.

By transporting alcohol he knowingly broke Saudi Law.

360 lashes! the punishment doesn't fit the crime,even a young man would be hard pressed to survive this Barbaric sentence!

The lashes will not be administered in one session. Usually they will be given in batches of 10 or 20 at a time with a week or more in between to recover. After Friday noon-day prayers is the usual flogging hour.

Also, the flogging may be administered in a hard way or in a more benign manner - depends on the guy doing the flogging, the local mullah and the supervising police authority. I have seen some strokes given that wouldn't have left even a red mark, others that made the punishee jump involuntarily to the full extent of the rope holding his arms.

The old man had obviously been pushing his luck and had not heeded warnings that would have been given to him by his Saudi sponsor. These things do not happen 'out of the blue', there are almost always discussions and coded warnings sent out long before action is taken.

please have mercy Humph! when i arrived in Saudi Arabia in 1974 a Saudi channel existed which broadcasted news, religious bla-bla, masri and lebnani soap operas, the bionic woman, the six million dollar man, a western series and every thursday evening a Bollywood film.

these kind of ridiculous fairy tales don't die of course. the same applies to Raytheon (one of my company's top clients) which is firmly established in Saudi Arabia since end of 1969 and was never thrown out. Raytheon is one of the pillars of the Saudi air defense system!

I arrived in Saudi for the first time in early 1979 - after fleeing Iran at roughly the same time as the Shah. We were in Tabuk, where we had a cinema on our compound, but no TV. My second tour was in the early 1990s, when I was based in Khobar whilst working on an upgrade to the East-West pipeline - I was housed in an apartment belonging to our client, again without TV. Evidently there was TV available, but nothing worth watching - as with most TV. I had, between these postings, been in Libya, where our compound had an internal cable network for TV, and Hong Kong, where I had TV in my apartment.

With regard to Raytheon, I may have been misled, but I am sure that in my latter days in Tabuk (I left the day Anwar Sadat was assassinated) the BAe guys told me that they were in trouble - as were Westinghouse. But then so was Lockheed for a time, and in Iran we were all deep in it.

Most of the so called ' refugees ' are economic transients looking to better their life in rich countries,

they have nothing to do with the Syrian crisis and many of them are from Africa...And did the few tens of thousand of Turkish workers who entered Germany to work back in the 70'-80' and become now part and parcel of Germany and a force to recon with so will the 'new people' in 20-30 years and goodbye white Europe and hello sharia laws, mosques and minarets all over the place.....

Given that there are probably less than 1.5 billion "whites" in a world of 7 billion people, the chances of there being a "white" anywhere are pretty slim don't you think?

And that is the real problem. When I was born, in the 1930s, the world population had just passed the two billion mark. This was also the number of human being who had ever lived on this planet, from year dot to the end of the nineteenth century. Since then the population has exploded, and is continuing to do so. There just ain't enough room for us all - not enough resources, not enough food, water, housing, schools, jobs, raw materials, medical help, financial depth. If one distributed all these resources equally among the current world population none of us would have what we consider to be enough. Yet by 2050 it is forecast that the world will be 9 billion strong! It cannot go on like this - we must reduce the world population to a manageable 4 billion now.

There are many Afghans among the river of migrants coming from Turkey.

Some may be legitimate asylum seekers / refugees, as they have previously co-operated with the US/UK/other forces that have occupied Afghanistan for more than ten years. Now that the Taliban are seeking to overthrow the democratically-elected new government, such people - and their families - may be at risk. However it seems to me, as an ill-informed observer, that most of the Afghan migrants are men without families. Who would desert their family and flee possible retribution, leaving their family without support and having to explain that their bread-winner is not in the country?

I have more sympathy with Sunni Iraqi men, who do not wish to be co-opted into ISIL, and of course the Syrian refugees, the 'other faith' people living in or near ISIL areas, and similar peoples who make up a fair proportion of the 'swarm' coming across the Turkish borders, but males who seem to be economic migrants in this mix - NO!

Any person with skills needed in Europe would be better placed to apply for a visa at the local consulates of various countries, then coming in legitimately. I have worked abroad for forty years in legitimate jobs with the correct paperwork - it would be fairly easy for qualified doctors, engineers, mechanics, technicians and such to get work visas and travel in the comfort of an aircraft or train or bus. The migrants who are walking to freedom are probably lacking the needed skills, or afraid that their families will be left behind. They will probably not add to the quality of the countries to which they are headed.

British ...

... making wine.

This information seems to me very strange.

The Germans package grape juice (Rausch is the most popular) which does not have inhibitors against fermentation in it.

One buys a box or several, boils some with sugar, let's it cool, add yeast and the rest of the juice, puts it into large sealed containers with 'bubblers' to let out the gasses produced and around ten days later bottles the stuff. I have not put in quantities as I would not want to corrupt tender young minds on this forum.

You may get a red flag - like this:

Yep. What do all the Saudi princes do when they get to Las Vegas in their private jets? Play mahjong, drink tea, and socialize with modestly dressed escorts whom they send home by 10PM so that they can go to bed early and maintain their celibacy? Oh, and pray 5 times a day in the middle of the casino to demonstrate their piousness. I'm sure that's what they do. If they didn't, they'd surely get 5000 lashes when they returned to the land of sand, oil, whips, severed hands and death by stoning. Very modern in a 13th century sort of way.

Not all the Saudi princes. Remember that King Saud had 27 sons (I think - I may be one or two out) and they have each had several sons. (Daughters aren't counted in this).

I recall in my early days in Saudi that one of the sons, who was a senior minister at the time, had to go to the US for a conference. In his hotel room was a TV set. He had not seen TV, as it was not allowed in Saudi until around 1990, as I recall. So he switched it on to see what all the fuss was about and was horrified to see unveiled women presenting and acting in shows. Also adverts showing people drinking alcohol. He cancelled his visit, flew home and reported to his brother the King (Fuad or Khaled, can't remember) that the US was Satan's Kingdom. This was about the time Raytheon were thrown out of Saudi, maybe an unrelated incident.

There seems to be something missing in many of the posts and that is they have laws and they enforce them. Most of the posts appear to be taking the line "it is just drink". How many of the people posting here know the reason for alcohol being banned in Saudi? I bet not many if any and it has nothing to do the Sharia law

In the Q'ran, as in the Old Testament, the injunction is 'not to get drunk'.

However, in later years, while alcohol was still permitted under Islamic Law, the joys of coffee were discovered by the Omani, Yemeni and Bahraini traders who sailed to Africa to pick up their cargoes of slaves and other goods. They brought the magic beans back to their home ports and tried to make a business of it. Things didn't go too well until they persuaded their religious leaders that coffee was a good thing - alcohol a bad thing. Thus alcohol was banned completely and remains so until this day.

I tend to agree with them. I am drinking some Arabica coffee at this moment. I seldom drink alcohol (though I used to!!).

I don;t think he was transporting wine in his car. He was making wine and selling it to Saudis which is a whole other thing. Saudis don't mind westerners drinking and making home brew in their compounds, but they draw a line at selling it to Saudis. This guy has been there for 25 years. He is past working age and is making lots of money brewing and selling alcohol to Saudis. He knew the risks and took them to make large amounts of money. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. I live here in Thailand, I respect the laws of the country whether I agree with them or not. No-one forced me to live here. Same with this guy, who does he think he is flouting the law then complaining when he's caught. Thrash him hard, I say.

Having made five separate tours in Saudi, each of about 2 1/2 years, I would have a couple more comments.

The man must have had a Saudi sponsor - not just his employer, but possibly a different sponsor who had influence to make sure the guy could manufacture his wine on a (local) commercial scale, and took a cut of the profits.

Alternatively, the guy was a mug, distributing the stuff for someone who was 'insured'.

I lived a lot of the time in compounds, and the rule was 'Never let the stuff pass the gates'. Also on two compounds we had a 'guest house' near the gates where drunken visitors were bedded down for the night, 'til they sobered up.

I had employees in trouble for many reasons - the Saudi authorities always came to my liaison officer, who came to me, and the employees were sacked and sent home within 24 hours. This guy must be a serial offender, or have upset his 'sponsor', to have been caught and punished like this. (At 74 years old he was probably becoming a pain in the backside - he should have left years before).

And such is the thought-process of those who wish to stay in.

No ambition, no vision of the future - just hide in your front room, keeping warm in front of a nice fire.

There is no future within the EU as it is presently constituted. And to 'change it from within' - there are 27 other countries (or thereabouts) wishing to change it to bring it closer to their ideas of how it should be run. Do you think all, or any, will be allowed to implement such changes? Only if you are a child believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and that you were found under a gooseberry bush.

A strong Britain trading with the world, in control of our own destiny and borders, with our own currency and our own laws, is the only way to have a future of prosperity and peace.

The one obvious point that everyone appears to have missed is the location - Swindon.

There is absolutely nothing else to do in Swindon.

I was based at RAF Yatesbury for nine months and we went to the nearest town (Swindon) every weekend - and could guarantee success with the girls every time. Greatest little town on earth!

This is not a laughing matter - more than 100 killed in a senseless attack on a peaceful gathering that wanted to promote a peaceful settlement of the Kurdish question in Turkey.

More of the injured will die from this blast, others will be crippled for life. And for what? Because Islamists, whether from ISIS (as the Turkish government now states) or supporters of Erdogan (as many Turks are suggesting), want to drag parts of the world back to the 12th century. This must not happen.

Turkey is a member of NATO and as such deserves the full support of it's partners in this time of distress. I don't know if Erdogan will welcome military combat troops on Turkey's soil, as has been suggested by the US, but surely we can help with medical care, with help for the Syrian refugees being hosted by Turkey - more than 2 million of them - and with suggestions of ways to sort out the Kurdish problem. Also to lower the rhetoric on the historical Armenian question. Turkey has an old history of poor governance of it's empire (caliphate), but so to has Britain and France. We have basically put behind us the colonial history of the UK, and of France, the atrocities of both World Wars, the divisions within Europe, but I have not seen such acceptance that Turkey, since Kamal Ataturk, is a modern state with views in line with those of most European states. I have not lived in Turkey, but I have worked with many Turks in many countries, and have found them to be of very similar views as myself.

As I have stated many times in other threads - when I was born in 1937 I was one of the 2 billion then alive on Planet Earth. That 2 billion were as many as all the people who had lived on the Earth from the first man until that time.

Now there are 7.5 billion people alive on this planet. It is far too many. A sustainable population would be less than half of what we now have. We need to cull the existing population and limit any potential for growth in the future.

The migration problem will only get worse until some drastic action is taken - look at Bangladesh for instance - a population of just over 70 million when it declared independence in the 1970s, now a population of 184 million, plus the millions who have migrated. And little or no resources in the place - only people.

As a non-American ( ) may I offer the practical solution to this argument - give the whole &lt;deleted&gt; place back to the Russians, from whom you virtually stole it in the first place!!

News update: She approved 2 men to marry their sister and cousin yesterday.

And yet the article states that she has issued NO licences for straight or other marriages.

Give documentary proof of your statement.

The USA is a VERY big country and resistance like this crazy lady clerk is very rare to the national ruling legalizing same sex marriage. So it's going very well overall. It's the rare crackpots that unfairly get all the attention.

You mean like sexual deviants?

Report.....

My friend, who I posted for, had an initial check-up and offer from Bangkok Pattaya. As we did not feel comfortable with the Dr.'s changing explanations and offers and staff being really pushy to sign up for surgery immediately, we paid the check-up and left.

Next day we went to Dr. Nattawat @: http://www.pattayaeyecenter.com/

This Dr. comes highly recommended and his CV shows a lot of experience. He speaks good E and we liked him immediately, also the clinic is much simpler than BPH. Also his staff very friendly. He had several patients there and seemed quite busy. The Dr. expalined all options in Detail and mentioned that 1 eye was so "bad" that the chances of not having to use glasses again were somewhat reduced.

My friend had both eyes done 2 days ago for cataracts and bad astigmatism with the newest model multi-focals on the market, a type that was not even mentioned @ BPH. We can't comment on the result yet, but treatment & surgery was flawless and friendly. Cost compares probably 20% below BPH.

We had Rutnin Hospital in mind, but my friend preferred to get it done locally. Regards. MS>

I had one eye done by Dr. Nattawat in 2007. Still perfect. He wanted to do both eyes at once, but I couldn't bear to be blind for a couple of days until the patches came off. My second eye needs doing, but I'm now back in the UK, so its NHS for me.

I thoroughly recommend Dr. Nattawat - I had previously started treatment with PBH, but they were so crude with their testing that I was scared to go for the operation. Dr. Nattawat saw me a couple of weeks later and set my mind at ease, performed the operation and had good after-care.

It is not an offence to carry weapons into many airports in America as long as you do not try and go thru security. You can carry them in your hands visible to everyone. Last weeks news and photos on the internet with it happening from one of the worlds largest email accounts holders, in their news section.

We're not talking about the idiotic attitude that the septics have to guns and other lethal weapons.

This is Pakistan, where arms are strictly controlled - only the army, the police and the Taliban terrorists are allowed to carry (and use) guns. Tourists are there to be shot at, not to do the shooting.