Gloves off; and, a little more steam – thanks GD.
I am becoming just a little disenchanted with the O’Sofullofit sheltered workshop. Seriously, consider the words spoken in what is, probably, a smart Aleck throw away line, an unplayable challenge:-
O'Sofullofit - "[If you've got evidence of what you've just spoken about, you need to particularise it carefully, you need to underpin it with the physical evidence, reference it and get it to the committee]."
Evidence – certainly.
Particularise? WTD is that? - Oxford – “Treat individually or in detail”. OK, so, we name names, dates, times and recount individual (stand alone) incidents. Furry Muff; but, unless there is a body of evidence citing ‘an individual’ and a particular case; the impetous of ‘collective embuggerance’ becomes bogged down in individual ‘cases’. CASA thrive on individual complaint. Here needs to be a cohesive, collective – almost a ‘class action’ mounted to demonstrate the habitual, sanctioned, legal actions against ‘the individual’. One at a time, they don’t signify. Collectively, they tell another story. O’Sofullofit, and his committee need to stop pissing about and allowing the CASA to claim ‘individual’ as in isolated affront. One scratch is something nothing. !000 cuts is certain death. The Coppers (bless ‘em) know this very well; one car pinched could be joy riders: but 20 is impossible to ignore; one thief OK; but to whom is he delivering? Thus major, organised crime is discovered. Particularise – Bollocks; shove it where the sun don’t shine.
Underpin – Oxford - Support, justify, or form the basis for. What a load of twaddle from O’Sofullofit. In short, you must be able to ‘prove’ a case before the investigators will even lift a buttock to break wind, let alone ‘investigate’. Problem is, without investigation and evidence of an act being produced – you’re buggered.
‘Reference it’. More pro-Bono ‘investigative’ required from the complainant before anyone will even take the trouble to make a note and take a look – time permitting. Another ‘qualified’ crock of the proverbial; from a man who should, and probably does, know a whole lot better.
It wearies my old bones to watch a fully cognisant committee stooge about the periphery; knowing full well that CASA is a basket case; fit only for the knackers yard and yet, despite the overt provocation; do sweet sod all to tackle the matter.
Time's up; Rome is burning, small Willy’s and low manifold pressure will not extinguish the flames. The committee probably ‘know’ more than even we do. Time fellah’s; piss on the pot or get off it. Two choices; no options; no negotiation.
Dancing around the Daisy’s is good fun when the sun shines bright. Now is the winter of our discontent – think on Senators; think long, hard and deep.
Will we rock you? Oh yes; on that you can rely - absolutely.
![[Image: Untitled%2B2.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Cm_HajunJBQ/Vuc7mMGoOSI/AAAAAAAAISU/PLJPRoRPvKUtliZvp7KwgHIZKQm9J3TpQ/s1600/Untitled%2B2.jpg)
I am becoming just a little disenchanted with the O’Sofullofit sheltered workshop. Seriously, consider the words spoken in what is, probably, a smart Aleck throw away line, an unplayable challenge:-
O'Sofullofit - "[If you've got evidence of what you've just spoken about, you need to particularise it carefully, you need to underpin it with the physical evidence, reference it and get it to the committee]."
Evidence – certainly.
Particularise? WTD is that? - Oxford – “Treat individually or in detail”. OK, so, we name names, dates, times and recount individual (stand alone) incidents. Furry Muff; but, unless there is a body of evidence citing ‘an individual’ and a particular case; the impetous of ‘collective embuggerance’ becomes bogged down in individual ‘cases’. CASA thrive on individual complaint. Here needs to be a cohesive, collective – almost a ‘class action’ mounted to demonstrate the habitual, sanctioned, legal actions against ‘the individual’. One at a time, they don’t signify. Collectively, they tell another story. O’Sofullofit, and his committee need to stop pissing about and allowing the CASA to claim ‘individual’ as in isolated affront. One scratch is something nothing. !000 cuts is certain death. The Coppers (bless ‘em) know this very well; one car pinched could be joy riders: but 20 is impossible to ignore; one thief OK; but to whom is he delivering? Thus major, organised crime is discovered. Particularise – Bollocks; shove it where the sun don’t shine.
Underpin – Oxford - Support, justify, or form the basis for. What a load of twaddle from O’Sofullofit. In short, you must be able to ‘prove’ a case before the investigators will even lift a buttock to break wind, let alone ‘investigate’. Problem is, without investigation and evidence of an act being produced – you’re buggered.
‘Reference it’. More pro-Bono ‘investigative’ required from the complainant before anyone will even take the trouble to make a note and take a look – time permitting. Another ‘qualified’ crock of the proverbial; from a man who should, and probably does, know a whole lot better.
It wearies my old bones to watch a fully cognisant committee stooge about the periphery; knowing full well that CASA is a basket case; fit only for the knackers yard and yet, despite the overt provocation; do sweet sod all to tackle the matter.
Time's up; Rome is burning, small Willy’s and low manifold pressure will not extinguish the flames. The committee probably ‘know’ more than even we do. Time fellah’s; piss on the pot or get off it. Two choices; no options; no negotiation.
Dancing around the Daisy’s is good fun when the sun shines bright. Now is the winter of our discontent – think on Senators; think long, hard and deep.
Will we rock you? Oh yes; on that you can rely - absolutely.