Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
Hi Marie
As far as I know, a fixed tank is acceptable if the gas outlet is turned off.. Lots of RVs use the tunnel. It's only LPG converted engines that are barred..
Great to be back! ..
Jim
Got to hand it to them.
Whenever the French have a gripe about anything they just blockade the ports......job done. No messin' about sitting around having "meetings" and "talks".
We'd ask permission!
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
They've certainly got their point across....plus a few million quid compo off their Government.I suppose it depends whether one considers it justifiable for a few people to cause so many problems for others, such as holiday makers and HGV drivers.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
They've certainly got their point across....plus a few million quid compo off their Government.
Alternatively i suppose they could have sat around a table having 'meetings' about when to arrange the next meeting and got absolutely nowhere.
Harbour blockade, Dunkirk, Calais, Boulogne, 1940.
And this blockade seems to do more damage to the UK economy than any other.
Common factor seems to be that others have to pay for France and its problems.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
Like sitting round a table and having endless meetings year in year out? We are pretty damn good at that and where has it got us? Absolutely nowhere.They've got their point across by taking action which was illegal, IMHO if an act is unlawful you can take legal steps to try to achieve a change legitimising that act but what you don't do is break the law just because it suits you.
No they aren't.Your fishermen are they so happy ?
You want to stay an Island, well, then develop your navy and find other ports in Europe than French ports !
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
if we have done the same we would have fishing fleet,i went to sea for 20y, now some one tell you that you can fish for so many days and got to put dead fish backin the sea
Like sitting round a table and having endless meetings year in year out? We are pretty damn good at that and where has it got us? Absolutely nowhere.Originally Posted by GJH
They've got their point across by taking action which was illegal, IMHO if an act is unlawful you can take legal steps to try to achieve a change legitimising that act but what you don't do is break the law just because it suits you.
Oh.......it's lost us plenty of industries.
The action taken by the French fishermen may well have been an 'illegal act'.....but at least there was no pussyfooting around for months on end.
Is governments giving in to illegal acts - and the inevitable consequent encouragement of those acts - what we want to see? If it is where is the line to be drawn?
To be honest Graham i've felt for a long time there is growing unrest within this country. People are fast losing patience with the blatant greed and hypocrisy of Governments. (Note i stated the plural......i make no exceptions for either party). There may be the odd one or maybe couple of MP's who are the exception, but out of 600 odd that is a miniscule minority. The rest are rotten to the the core and corrupt as hell.Fair enough, that's a comment which differs from my opinion on illegal acts and I accept that views can differ.
Just for completeness though, what about a comment on the other part of my post:
Graham
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
How long are people going to put up with 'being nice' and 'sitting around a table' talking?.
(big snip)
How long are people going to put up with 'being nice' and 'sitting around a table' talking?
If we carry on like this i can see us heading toward civil war.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
During my lifetime there have been just two examples i can think of where dramatic changes were brought about......neither of which involved sitting around talking, both of which could be termed 'illegal acts'.As I said earlier "if an act is unlawful you can take legal steps to try to achieve a change legitimising that act but what you don't do is break the law just because it suits you."
Taking steps within the law is not just sitting round and talking but neither is it deliberately damaging others as is the action of the French fishermen in this case.
We have had enough civil wars in this country to prove that they are not the answer. The British version of democracy may not be working but the way to change it is to get involved and do something positive and constructive. It might feel like banging your head against a brick wall at times and it can take a lot of effort but it can work in the end.
Graham
During my lifetime there have been just two examples i can think of where dramatic changes were brought about......neither of which involved sitting around talking, both of which could be termed 'illegal acts'.
(snip)
So it would seem Graham that contrary to what you believe, sometimes breaking a law or laws in order to achieve change not only does work, but also resulted in people actually being listened to. Something which Government and politicians are not very good at.
Some chap called Guido Fawkes attempted to blow up the Houses of Parliament. Prior to that Britain had no Explosives Act.OK, got to hold my hands up and admit you are right in those cases. Bound to be some I suppose
However, doesn't the fact that you can think of just two examples illustrate that for the most part acting illegally does not achieve change?
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
Didn't really get what he wanted though did heSome chap called Guido Fawkes attempted to blow up the Houses of Parliament. Prior to that Britain had no Explosives Act.
I reckon you could say he made some changes. Certainly woke Parliament up.
That could be argued - but it could also be argued that the "meeker" majority made the case despite their more militant colleagues.The suffragette movement of the early 1900's who militantly fought for the right to vote which was eventually granted in 1928, openly used whatever means possible no matter how 'illegal'. The meeker suffragist who sought the same but used conventional legal methods got absolutely nowhere and were quickly forgotten about.
Yes, I've actually thought of another myself. The Grunwick and similar disputes of the late 1970s and early 1980s which led the Thatcher government to pass legislation to curb the trades unions.There are undoubtedly many other examples, but the two i gave are what i will always remember from my lifetime in my own country where real people power forced change by making the Government listen.
But as Guido & Grunwick showed, the change which results may not always be what those acting illegally actually want.A lot depends upon commitment. History has shown that sometimes acting outside the law, or illegally, is the only way to bring about change.
To be honest Graham i've felt for a long time there is growing unrest within this country. People are fast losing patience with the blatant greed and hypocrisy of Governments........
............OK we have a democracy. We vote our politicians in......and eventually we vote for our own choice of party. But it's not working very well and hasn't done for a long time.........
.................The taxpaying public gets well and truly smacked every single time. We've bankrolled the financial plunderers only to see our money being handed out in great wads to the crooks that were not only responsible for running these Banks, but were already being paid telephone number salaries, the likes of which the rest of us will never ever see in a lifetime.................
................How long are people going to put up with 'being nice' and 'sitting around a table' talking?
If we carry on like this i can see us heading toward civil war.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
The suffragette movement of the early 1900's who militantly fought for the right to vote which was eventually granted in 1928, openly used whatever means possible no matter how 'illegal'. The meeker suffragist who sought the same but used conventional legal methods got absolutely nowhere and were quickly forgotten about.
I'm not so sure the suffragist actually was a majority force.That could be argued - but it could also be argued that the "meeker" majority made the case despite their more militant colleagues.
Excellent isn't it?It is interesting to note that a simple social conflict in France (as there is a lot each year) provoke a rich debate about democracy :thumb:
Subscribers do not see these advertisements