• Hi all and welcome to TheWoodHaven2 brought into the 21st Century, kicking and screaming! We all have Alasdair to thank for the vast bulk of the heavy lifting to get us here, no more so than me because he's taken away a huge burden of responsibility from my shoulders and brought us to this new shiny home, with all your previous content (hopefully) still intact! Please peruse and feed back. There is still plenty to do, like changing the colour scheme, adding the banner graphic, tweaking the odd setting here and there so I have added a new thread in the 'Technical Issues, Bugs and Feature Requests' forum for you to add any issues you find, any missing settings or just anything you'd like to see added/removed from the feature set that Xenforo offers. We will get to everything over the coming weeks so please be patient, but add anything at all to the thread I mention above and we promise to get to them over the next few days/weeks/months. In the meantime, please enjoy!

The Times

The censorship is so infantile and petty in The Times I'm surprised anyone still reads it (Ex 27 year subscriber.) That said, with 1984 looming they'll all go the same way.
 
I’d like to take the credit, but I imagine someone from the EA spotted the photo.
Then it was a question of damage limitation by his lackeys.
He broke the law so ought to get a fine.
 
Why do self-important, self-serving, politicos always, always, think there are two kinds of law? One rigidly enforced one for their voting public and the other - that doesn't matter - for them?

They're too busy enhancing their braggadocio to care, I suppose.
 
My concern is about the quality of the people who are supposed to support and advise him.
After all he isn’t the sharpest knife in the box.

Sorry, getting a bit political!
 
I was only partially paying attention to the news showing the dynamic duo, but did not see them actually dipping a hook in the water. Were they fishing or just playing with their rods?
 
I think this was pure ignorance. It's actually ridiculous to need a licence to fish on private land that you are allowed to live on (grace and favour). Media has as usual created a storm in a teacup. JDV could not have been expected to know.

The fishing poles (no reels as far as I could see) must have been there for a reason - I doubt Lammy nipped down to his local tackle shop.
 
AJB Temple said:
I think this was pure ignorance. It's actually ridiculous to need a licence to fish on private land that you are allowed to live on (grace and favour). Media has as usual created a storm in a teacup. JDV could not have been expected to know.

The fishing poles (no reels as far as I could see) must have been there for a reason - I doubt Lammy nipped down to his local tackle shop.
Click to expand...
Well you know the law as well as the rest of us, ignorance is no defence.
Us common yokels who are anglers think the current law is sensible and like most laws there is a good reason for them when you delve deeper.

Is it a teacup? Or are you content that an elite think that they are above the law, or is that just laws that you personally approve of?
 
Last edited:
I'd say ignorance as well, after all you just need to look at the calibre of the bloke, but as Lurker said the law is the law and no excuse for breaking it.

I'm a fly fisherman and I pay my dues, I'd prefer not of course but for the sake of ÂŁ20 p.a (concession rate) I'm not going to argue when the vast majority of the revenue is used to enhance and protect fisheries.

There are very many stupid and seemingly unnecessary laws but we have to abide by them or accept the consequences. Anyone who objects is perfectly entitled to voice that opinion to the relevant lawmakers, for what good it would do.
 
Lurker said:
Well you know the law as well as the rest of us, ignorance is no defence.
Us common yokels who are anglers think the current law is sensible and like most laws there is a good reason for them when you delve deeper.

Is it a teacup? Or are you content that an elite think that they are above the law, or is that just laws that you personally approve of?
Click to expand...
You misunderstand. This is clearly a trivial and trifling matter that is getting a lot of media coverage. They didn't even catch anything - they twitched a pole about over some water for a photo op with journalists present. There are more important things to worry about than not catching some fish without a cheap licence.

Why describe yourself as a "yokel"? Definition is an uneducated and unsophisticated person from the countryside. Does that describe you? I doubt it. And if not, how does that help sensible debate about media behaviour? It's a daft story but Lammy is an open goal for such things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top