Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:13 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Before the workplace smoking ban, at my workplace they banned smoking in the office but allowed smokers to use a special manky room.
The non-smokers said it wasn't fair that smokers could just slope off whenever they felt like it, so the employers thought they'd reward the non-smokers with extra hols instead.
I can't remember the number of days it came down to ... but a colleague worked it out that it was the equivalent of being out of the office for ten fags per working day, which wasn't fair, as he was a twenty-a-day non-smoker.

Fooking right. Used to drive me potty. When I worked for a long defunct tour operator many years ago we almost had a mutiny, so many staff were spending hours each day outside, leaving the rest of us covering for them. Lazy smelly wasters with yellow teef.

6 cigs a day @ 15 minutes per cig = 1.5 hours x 5 days = 7.5 hours a week. A whole working day, each week, lost to fellating a cancer stick. 40+ish days per year (allowing for 4 weeks leave and Lubbock holidays). And why? "Because I'm an addict." Oh really, well let me just pop out ferra wee dram o' Jamiesons or a quick punt on Betfair.

Never hire smokers or women of a certain age.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:44 pm  

Seriously though looking at the video of the M6 "incident" this must have set the taxpayer back a goodly seven figure sum of money apart from causing widespread disruption. It's ridiculous over-reaction to nothing. the most obvious point of all is that IF the smoker had in fact been a bomber then he'd have had a couple of hours to set off his bleedin' bomb. What was the theory - that he would try to sit it out, and hope than when they searched his smoking bag, they missed his bomb?FFS. Embarrassing and ludicrous.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:55 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Seriously though looking at the video of the M6 "incident" this must have set the taxpayer back a goodly seven figure sum of money apart from causing widespread disruption. It's ridiculous over-reaction to nothing. the most obvious point of all is that IF the smoker had in fact been a bomber then he'd have had a couple of hours to set off his bleedin' bomb. What was the theory - that he would try to sit it out, and hope than when they searched his smoking bag, they missed his bomb?FFS. Embarrassing and ludicrous.

It'll be written off as a decent training exercise.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:42 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Seriously though looking at the video of the M6 "incident" this must have set the taxpayer back a goodly seven figure sum of money apart from causing widespread disruption. It's ridiculous over-reaction to nothing. the most obvious point of all is that IF the smoker had in fact been a bomber then he'd have had a couple of hours to set off his bleedin' bomb. What was the theory - that he would try to sit it out, and hope than when they searched his smoking bag, they missed his bomb?FFS. Embarrassing and ludicrous.

Isn't everything like that now though?

When I was a kid I remember walking along the side of threepennies in Madely Street baths, to ge to ninepennies. As I walked along, a big blind eel came steaming past me. I pointed it out to the attendant, who grabbed a net, fished out the offending turd and everything carried on.

If that happened today, the pool would've been evacuated, then drained and subject to a deep-clean and everyone involved offered counselling.

[John_D]

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 7:46 pm  

I'm just off to put the kettle on. Someone let the polis know eh?

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:05 pm  

Cronus wrote:

6 cigs a day @ 15 minutes per cig .

How long were those cigarettes?

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:38 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Seriously though looking at the video of the M6 "incident" this must have set the taxpayer back a goodly seven figure sum of money apart from causing widespread disruption. It's ridiculous over-reaction to nothing. the most obvious point of all is that IF the smoker had in fact been a bomber then he'd have had a couple of hours to set off his bleedin' bomb. What was the theory - that he would try to sit it out, and hope than when they searched his smoking bag, they missed his bomb?FFS. Embarrassing and ludicrous.

If some idiot rings 999 and says "a bloke on our bus is preparing a bomb", what the feck do you expect them to do?

Not sure you can blame the authorities for this one. If they'd not bothered and the bus had exploded they'd be universally panned, investigated, heads would roll, etc.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Thu Jul 05, 2012 9:00 pm  

wigan_rlfc wrote:

How long were those cigarettes?

Seriously? At the place I'm talking about it was 2-3 minutes to the exit, a moment to light up, probably up to 10 minutes minutes to smoke then 2-3 minutes back to the desk.

Whatever, if it's 10 or 15 minutes it still adds up to a shitload of time at work you're getting paid to kill yourself. You can kill yourself in your own time.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:49 am  

Cronus wrote:

If some idiot rings 999 and says "a bloke on our bus is preparing a bomb", what the feck do you expect them to do?

Not sure you can blame the authorities for this one. If they'd not bothered and the bus had exploded they'd be universally panned, investigated, heads would roll, etc.

I expect them to use their well trained and well paid brains!

Well, I would ask them what they knew about feckin bombs to convince me that's what he was doing. Mostly, if I could, I'd do something that did not involve (as it here did) giving the putative bomber 2 hours to explode his putative device before anyone did anything.

Then, if I felt the moron was giving me at least enough suspicions that it might genuinely be something serious, I wouldn't instruct them to park up and make sure all passengers stayed on the bus until platoons of troops and police arrived, since the longer they stayed on the bus, the longer they stood a great chance of being blown to smithereens, gassed or whatever I suspected.

Mostly, I'd assume that if by pouring some liquid into some bag and producing smoke, nothing had either blown up, or gassed anybody at that stage, then it was almost certainly bollox, and not at all justifying such an outrageous response.

Under your expectation, (which is that on getting such a call, that is what they MUST do) the terrorists could bankrupt a country in a week, they just place 50 of those calls a day and soon the entire economy is fooked and the country is paralysed.

Re: Terrorism is back? : Fri Jul 06, 2012 9:07 am  

Obviously, there are some citizens in Bradford who are slightly behind the NEWS CURVE whem it comes to matters terrorist....

Obviously, there are some citizens in Bradford who are slightly behind the NEWS CURVE whem it comes to matters terrorist....