Politics lobby 8

Hello there fellow chatters of PL8. Here is what I have managed to find out regarding the yahoo fiasco - this information has been taken from the yahoo blog site, the yahelite forum site and another site which nitwit kindly pointed me to.

Yahoo servers have reached their maximum capacity therefore Yahoo decided to go ahead with their much needed server maintenance and updates. This is currently being done. One of the causes of the overload is the problematic bots which can create hundreds of Id's very quickly. In an attempt to resolve this apparently Yahoo are coralling the bots in the server space for the politics lobbys and will be running a catchum programme to erradicate them. They have also begun to alter their codes etc to enable them to block bots in future, however this has a knock on effect for third party chat clients like yahelite, cheetah chat, yimlite and yazak, the new yahoo cannot tell the difference between these and bots so all of the authors of these programmes have been toiling away like wee trojans to write programmes for us which will work - many thanks to their efforts.
One frustrating consequence of yahoo working on the servers is that we are currently frustrated in our efforts to join a room that we wish to join - this is because for the time being you will be put in the first available room within your topic of choice until that room is filled. This is a way to make new freinds but makes it bloody difficult to meet existing chat freinds. However, if you can manage to get there - we are managing to congregate in Washington Watch 5 - hope you make it - good luck and in the meantime use this space to post.

Now as anyone here will know I am not a footie fan. I have however just watched the FA Cup final at wembley between Chelsea and Man Utd and am left wondering if the linesmen and the ref need;
a)eyesight tests
b)Are in the pay of the russian mafia
c)Are closet Chelsea fans

I watched with my mouth open as chelsea got away with dirty play after dirty play, while Man Utd were pulled up for exactly the same things when they tried it.

As we have all witnessed on our tv's Ryan Giggs did score that goal - the ball was over the line and the goalie pushed it back over. One of the replays showed very clearly that the ball was over the line. The score should have been 1 -1 and gone to a penalty shoot out! Henceforth the Chelsea goalie shall be known as cheater cech, because that is what he did - he cheated.

Right across Europe people are being urged to look out for Madeline. Her family have launched a very distinctive 'LOOK for Madeline' campaign which I hope will be effective in finding her. Her distraught family are to be congratulated on their resolve with regards to having Madeline returned safely and I am sure that all of our hearts go out to them during this horrendous ordeal.

Emotions aside there are some pertinent questions that need to be asked regarding this case. I and others from PL8 have commented on what appears to be disproportionate media coverage in regards to this case - why is THIS case being given such an amount of time in the media, when there are many children who go missing whom we hardly hear about?
We are left wondering if the same coverage would be given to a child from a home where their parents are not of the professional class (a GP and a Cardiologist) and if the media would be so determined in that instance to portray leaving 2yr old twins and a 3yr old alone as a 'norm'.
2yr olds and 3yr olds don't always sleep when put to bed, in most homes children of that age are monitored by a baby monitor and checked on regularly, leaving them can have disasterous consequences. Young children should never be left without adequate supervision and nipping back from a restaurant every 30 mins to check on them is not adequate supervision. Most parents would not dream of leaving their young children alone to go out to socialise or dine - Most parents would either employ a babysitter or take the children with them, that is the act of a responsible parent. Yet I have watched with amazement as over and over again the media have tried to push this issue to the background, at one stage the media told us that the Warner complex has a babysitting service, this hasn't raised questions as to why it wasnt employed to look after these 3 children. What message are they sending out to parents? Is it acceptable and responsible to go out and leave your children alone in your own home, or indeed in an apartment abroad?

This morning I heard a guest speaker on the BBC's Breakfast programme refer to the collective concern for Madeline as a religious experience - what on earth is going on here? Any ideas

We can understand that the main issue at this time must be the safe return of Madeline, that has to be the priority. But I and others are left wondering if the parents were from a different socio-economic background would the media be asking the questions that most of us are asking and not trying to normalise this issue.

The UN issue was raised yesterday in the chatroom by a number of very perceptive chatters. We have for a long time heard some of our American chatters complaining about the UN and how its workings and indeed that their forces contribute a great deal to the UNs work. It appears that now certain UK chatters are beginning to feel the same grievances and it is very understandable. The UN works to solve problems in the world through diplomacy, bargaining, democratic efforts, however when these tools don't work the UN asks its members to provide forces to exert other pressures on certain nations or to keep the peace between nations. Predominately these forces tend to come in large numbers from the same groups of western nations, the USA, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Other nations from around the world also send forces particularly although in lesser numbers and with less frequency. How do these nations now feel, seeing Iran deliberately make an incursion into Iraqi waters and kidnap service personnel engaged in UN business? The immediate response from the UN should have been a strong one, but there was silence. Today we awake to the news that the UN have framed a response, it is worded in such a way that it has absolutely no bite! Our forces are part of the teeth of the UN and the UN seems happy to allow Iran to act as a dentist performing uncalled for extractions of healthy teeth, the UN seems content to say nothing about this and then when it does summon the courage to say something, it merely bumps its gums and orders dentures!

Its about time the UN realised that nations who until now have routinely sent their people into harms way on UN business are unlikely to continue to do so unless the UN takes IMMEDIATE ACTION TO SANCTION IRAQ FOR ITS ILLEGAL ACTIONS AND DEMAND THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF ALL PERONNEL.

Do you agree that if the UN does not secure the release of the Hostages with immediate effect the UK and other allied nations should refuse to participate in the UN and withdraw all their troops from UN actions?

Yes indeed there is a cunning plan afoot to secure the release of the British Sailors and Marines. We are indeed gifted to have come up with this concept. Our cunning plan is to get one of HM's finest vessels and instead of a mermaid at the front of the Ship we will put Margaret Thatcher there , she will be looking glorious and will be carrying a rocket propelled explosive handbag for the purposes of chucking it ashore in Iran. I am sure that the Iranians will immediately let the Sailors and Marines go once they hear that Maggie is on her way to take them on!

Fact 1. The Royal Navy is engaged under UN Mandate and with the permission of the Iraqi Government in operations pertaining to the prevention of smuggling in Iraqi waters.

Fact 2. The British sailors and Marines were abducted by Iranians inside Iraqi waters.

Fact 3. Iran has out the Sailors and Marines on tv.

So the UK was good enough to carry out its duties as part of the UN and yet when IRAN makes an incursion into IRAQI waters and kidnaps personnel engaged in legitimate UN duties - the UN does nothing. The UN does not immediately get in touch with IRAN and say ' that the illegal detention of the service personnel is considered an ACT OF AGGRESSION BY THE STATE OF IRAN AGAINST THE UN'. They should have, but they haven't. This opens up the question - why on earth are we putting our forces in harms way on behalf of the United Nations, if the United Nations are not willing to afford those (who engage in duties on its behalf) Protection. The USA, The UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are the teeth of the UN, without these forces it has NO BITE - I demand that the UN act to get these forces released.

I think we (in PL8) are all aware that putting captured military personnel on tv in this manner constitutes a WAR CRIME. Again the UN needs to act.

And last but by no means least -the TV broadcast shows 6 men and 1 woman eating - where are the remaining 8 personnel? Are those eating the people who Iran has managed to force to co-operate? Are the rest blindly and repetatively giving name rank and number to their captors. It is blindingly obvious that Leading Seaman Turney was under duress, that her manufactured statement and letter was obtained using foul means not fair. So what is happening to the people not on tv?

And to inspire you to vote the good folks at YouScotland.com have come up with a charming ditty and video collection.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JmDY8biZzU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK6jHFezO_8

Enjoy them and don't forget to vote in May, regardless of who you intend to vote for remember - every vote counts. I would still like to see a none of the above box on the ballot to allow me to register disatisfaction with all the parties and candidates offered - I live in hope.

We can all breathe, Christopher Hitchens is alive and well and hasnt topped himself as suggested by chatter X, Neither is he languishing behind bars or smashing rocks in a chain gang - it appears a case of mistaken identity or deliberate story telling - the Motive? Well thats for you to determine.

Last night (UK time) there was a heated debate taking place between Nonac (BNP Supporter) and Hugo Rudd ( Conservative) regarding the issue of sharing a political platform for the purposes of debate. The idea of not sharing a public debating forum with the likes of the BNP is prevalent within most mainstream political parties and a notion I find quite worrying. I believe that not allowing the BNP to debate their policies in public means that they can publicise their spin without any means of having to defend and explain the real agenda in public. Do you remember the Home Secretaries Heckler and how when interviewed for the radio his real agenda was uncovered, a very public revelation of a very worrying and dangerous agenda. Without that public forum we would never have heard his true purpose and his vision for the UK.
Arthur 2 sheds came up with a wonderful suggestion when I said that I would like to see the BNP on Question time with the other political players. He suggested that Nick Griffin and Tony Benn could participate in the same edition - wouldnt that be something to behold. I think if anyone can get under Griffins spin and reveal the real BNP Ideology it would be Tony Benn. What do you think?

Rumours abound in Politics Lobby 8 concerning a chatter who goes by the name of Christopher Hitchens. Named after a mediocre journalist he has often come across as a racist bigot in the chatroom. He has also made claim to amassing wealth. The chatter concerned also had a series of liasons with another female chatter who shall be known as chatter x. At one point this relationship turned very sour and chatter hitchens distributed some rather pornographic photos which he declared to be of himself engaged in sexual acts with chatter x. Chatter hitchens has since disappeared from the chat scene but chatter x has informed everyone that the following story is about chatter Hitchens.

http://www.pickensprogress.com/mortgage-fraud-lawsuit.html
The story is below in full

'Opening arguments heard in mortgage fraud lawsuit'

By Michael Moore
'Opening statements in a lawsuit involving a list of area building contractors, developers, and a bank were heard in Pickens County Superior Court Wednesday. However, further argument was delayed until the two parties resolve a question of equitable relief for the defendants, which could take at least six weeks.
Besides, both the plaintiff and defendants indicated they want the case to proceed to a jury trial.
Filed in January, the suit has Bent Tree property owners Walter and Linda White accusing six defendants of running a mortgage fraud scam in which they deceived the Whites into giving up their property, and of pocketing money from a bank loan instead of spending it on construction of the Whites' house.
Lawyers for defendants described an opposite scenario in Wednesday's hearing--that it was Walter White who tried to get "twice the house for half the money" in an attempt to con the builders he hired to construct a home on his Bent Tree lot.
Defendants in the case include Balfour Builders, Inc.; HNS Investments, LLC; S & K Landmark Development, LLC; all of which are Georgia companies doing business in Pickens County.
Also named as defendants are Pickens County resident Robert W. Kitsell, an employee of Balfour Builders; and California resident Harold Shaffer, an officer of Balfour Builders and a member of the two LLC's. Chestatee State
Continued on page 13A
Bank was named in the initial complaint, but was dismissed from the lawsuit as part of an agreement between the plaintiffs and defendants reached Wednesday.
Judge Harry Doss said because of the "sheer magnitude" of the case, he plans to hear it in full this year, perhaps even setting a special trial week for that purpose.
According to attorney Larry Butler, in June 2005, his clients Walter and Linda White hired Balfour Builders to build a home on property they owned for over 20 years. Kitsell, identified as the secretary of Balfour, told the couple that in order to get a construction loan they should sign their property over to the company with a quit-claim deed, which they did.
After agreeing to and signing a construction contract with Walter White, Kitsell used the lot as collateral to acquire a loan from Chestatee State Bank that was sizably bigger than the amount on the contract, according to the complaint that was filed January 12.
Kitsell is further accused of forgery for signing Walter White's name to a false construction contract for $429,000. He allegedly used the forged contract to acquire the inflated loan from the bank.
Almost two years later, construction on the house is unfinished.
In July 2006, Kitsell was arrested by the Pickens County Sheriff's Office for his alleged involvement in the scheme. He was charged with forgery, residential mortgage fraud, and theft by deception.
The complaint accuses the defendants of being guilty of violating RICO statutes, or racketeering crimes. If defendants are found guilty in the case, the Whites could be entitled to triple the actual amount of damages.
In the complaint, the Whites are seeking not only the triple sum, but also $3,000,000 in punitive damages, plus their attorneys' fees.
The Whites entered the courtroom Wednesday with the intent to seek equitable relief, or a court order to protect their property, which is still owned by Kitsell. Butler said they were concerned that Kitsell may sell the property, or the bank may foreclose.
An agreement reached between the two parties, however, made such relief unnecessary. According to that agreement, Kitsell will attempt to substitute another property he owns as collateral for the loan he is accused of acquiring fraudulently.
If the bank accepts the new collateral, it will have no ability to foreclose on the Whites' lot. Furthermore, in a previous hearing, the court granted the plaintiff a restraining order preventing Kitsell from selling the property the Whites claim is theirs.
Chestatee State Bank, which had been named as a defendant for processing the fraudulent loan, will be dropped from the suit as part of the agreement.
Greg Melton, attorney for the LLC's in the lawsuit, said the substitution of collateral would likely be accepted by the bank, but it will take at least four weeks. No further hearings in the case are scheduled until the agreement is finalized.
Melton, who also represents Harold Shaffer, said the case is nothing more than a business dispute between Walter White and the company he hired to build his house. He said Kitsell never had any intention to keep the Whites' property, and he planned to build the house to completion until the dispute began.
"This is a business dispute about how much Walter White should be paying for the custom home he ordered Balfour to build," said Melton. He said White "repudiated" his initial agreement with Balfour and Kitsell, by ordering extensive changes to the construction plans. When he was told he would have to pay extra for the changes, White refused and Balfour pulled off the job, Melton said.
Identifying Walter White as an "educated professional," Melton said the suggestion that he was conned is "ludicrous." He said White indicated to Kitsell that he did not want to be involved in the loan process, and the two agreed a quit-claim deed to Kitsell would accommodate that desire.
Signing White's name to the construction contract he presented to the bank was not a forgery, according to attorney George Weaver, who is representing Kitsell and his interests in the defendant companies.
He said Kitsell did not sign the name in an attempt to claim he was Walter White, and did not do so in an attempt to defraud anyone. The document accurately represented an oral agreement between Kitsell and White, Weaver said.
The lawsuit is "an incredible flim-flam, or confidence game, perpetrated by Walter White and Linda White," said Weaver, adding they have tried to "blackmail" Robert Kitsell and Balfour Builders.
He also questioned why the plaintiffs' lawyers had access to private financial records that were part of an ongoing Sheriff's Office investigation.'

chatter x maintains that chatter hitchens is Robert Kitsell and some of the past claims by Hitchens appear to point to this being the case. However in another turn of events chatter x now claims that chatter Hitchens has popped his earthly cloggs and departed this earth in an act of violence against himself. Is this true? We dont know.... all comments welcome