Forums65
Topics76,434
Posts1,033,800
Members14,782
|
Most Online30,276 Jan 9th, 2025
|
|
8 members (AR_One, 2 invisible),
13,859
guests, and
554
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
|
|
Re: Storeton Radar Station WW2 era
AR_One
3 hours ago
Brilliant pics - remember sneaking into there as a teen in the 80s and it was full of all sorts of cr@p including a dead cat in a carrier bag. Amazing the one with the houses on Stanley avenue in the backgroud
5
2,579
Read More
|
|
Re: Lucy Letby
diggingdeeper
4th Feb 2025 2:54pm
Common sense is starting to prevail https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...lucy-letby-conviction-expert-panel-findsThat statement also concurs with what I hypothesised previously about a a failing department looking for a scape goat. This could be a travesty for Letby, the justice system and the families of the babies involved in this case. Not only would the families find out their babies weren't murdered but also they may have died through medical negligence. the Countess of Chester’s neonatal unit was overworked, understaffed, had plumbing issues and was staffed by “inadequate numbers of appropriately trained” clinicians. It said there were “numerous problems” in the care of the 17 babies, including a failure to properly carry out “basic medical procedures, delays in their treatment and the misdiagnosis of diseases" “so many problems with the medical care” of the babies and nothing to support the claim they were attacked Furthermore, if the prosecutors misrepresented evidence in court, is that not perjury? I also raise questions as to why the identity of some of the witnesses in court were kept secret, there is absolutely no reason in a case like this for that to occur. Perhaps without that anonymity their damning statements may not have been the same?
2
522
Read More
|
|
Re: Heathrow's third Runway
Jeremy
3rd Feb 2025 12:26pm
We should be removing business tax relief for international travel, most business passenger travel is totally unnecessary these days. Spot the guy who doesn't do big business internationally. Can you explain why it is "necessary" rather than "expected"? Loads of people like to keep the "jollies" system going. As soon as we could we introduced videoconferencing but it was a number of years before that would work internationally. Relationships aren't built and maintained through a computer screen, especially when it comes to multi-million £/$ deals and the need for close collaboration. It is absolutely necessary in a lot of instances. Yearly conferences and the industry coming together is totally necessary for example. Granted, not all travel is necessary and brief catch ups can be done remotely, some air travel is unnecessary but you will never get to a point where it all can, nor should it. How sad a world we'd live in if we never left our houses and explored the world.
7
338
Read More
|
|
Click to View Topic.
|
|
Posts: 14,460
Joined: July 2008
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Lucy Letby
by diggingdeeper - 16th Dec 2024 6:16pm
|
|
|
|
|