lizziec: (BSG - Starbuck frustrated (mini))
Today I have anger. I am pissed and I would very much like to yell at someone and can't.

I've been suspecting for a little while that some of our post has been going astray. I've been trying to organise a headstone for mum's grave and twice now the paperwork has gone missing in the post (incidentally the woman at the Masons sounded rather incredulous that this had happened which is one of the reasons I'm so wound up. As if I'd make it up and ask her to send out the same stuff three times. This time I've asked her to send it recorded delivery and add the charge to the amount for the headstone).

Now some of the paperwork we need to buy the house has gone missing in the post meaning that the whole process of that has been delayed and I am really fucking angry.

So I called up Royal Mail because I want to talk to someone, an actual person about this problem and my concerns about the lost post and I get a bloody phone tree that doesn't put me through to a person but to a recording that redirects me to their website and tells me to fill in a form. I'll fill it in, but I have the feeling that it will eventually come back with "not our problem".

In the meantime it's entirely possible that our post will go missing again. And who knows what already has?

This entry was originally posted at http://lizziec.dreamwidth.org/425586.html. There are currently comments on the original entry.

I voted

5 May 2011 12:00 pm
lizziec: (toys - max at work)
I voted at about 7:35 this morning which felt veeeeeeeeery early. Still, it's done now and I'm feeling rather Meh about the whole thing. I voted because it's my civic duty and I believe very strongly that I should be exercising it because of all the people in the past who couldn't and campaigned for my right to do it.

my polling card

But...

I had to hold my nose and vote for the least-worst option and that left me feeling rather dirty. I shouldn't come out of the polling booth feeling dirty because I had to vote and all the choices were pretty much equally dire. Let's take these decisions one at a time.

Local council elections )

AV referendum )

ETA: This is an example of what I mean. How could one not vote against a campaign that has posters like this?
The last No to AV poster from Conservative HQ. No, really. WTF? )

This entry was originally posted at http://lizziec.dreamwidth.org/417044.html. There are currently comments on the original entry.

I voted

5 May 2011 12:00 pm
lizziec: (toys - max at work)
I voted at about 7:35 this morning which felt veeeeeeeeery early. Still, it's done now and I'm feeling rather Meh about the whole thing. I voted because it's my civic duty and I believe very strongly that I should be exercising it because of all the people in the past who couldn't and campaigned for my right to do it.

my polling card

But...

I had to hold my nose and vote for the least-worst option and that left me feeling rather dirty. I shouldn't come out of the polling booth feeling dirty because I had to vote and all the choices were pretty much equally dire. Let's take these decisions one at a time.

Local council elections )

AV referendum )

ETA: This is an example of what I mean. How could one not vote against a campaign that has posters like this?
The last No to AV poster from Conservative HQ. No, really. WTF? )

This entry was originally posted at http://lizziec.dreamwidth.org/417044.html. There are currently comments on the original entry.

I voted

5 May 2011 12:00 pm
lizziec: (Max at work)
I voted at about 7:35 this morning which felt veeeeeeeeery early. Still, it's done now and I'm feeling rather Meh about the whole thing. I voted because it's my civic duty and I believe very strongly that I should be exercising it because of all the people in the past who couldn't and campaigned for my right to do it.

my polling card

But...

I had to hold my nose and vote for the least-worst option and that left me feeling rather dirty. I shouldn't come out of the polling booth feeling dirty because I had to vote and all the choices were pretty much equally dire. Let's take these decisions one at a time.

Local council elections )

AV referendum )

ETA: This is an example of what I mean. How could one not vote against a campaign that has posters like this?
The last No to AV poster from Conservative HQ. No, really. WTF? )
lizziec: (potterpuffs - molly kill)
...and the mole just whacked us rather than vice versa :/

In which I bitch and moan about the amount of paperwork to be found with regards to mum's estate and Anwell Vetinary Centre in Coulsdon )
lizziec: (LDS- Young women)
Continued from here.

*Minor rant about mormons and visions of my father )

lizziec: (LDS- Young women)
Continued from here.

*Minor rant about mormons and visions of my father )

lizziec: (LDS- Young women)
Continued from here.

*Minor rant about mormons and visions of my father )
lizziec: (me - mummy and little lizzie)
Ben and I spent some time today sorting out some flowers and a balloon for mum's cubicle at the hospital, to make it a little more bright, having first checked that the ward allows flowers. We ended up getting a beautiful box of flowers from Mad Lillies in Banstead, which is where we got our wedding flowers from. That done, and with Phil back from work, we all headed up to Tooting to visit mum, getting to the hospital at about 5:15pm.

It was immediately clear that mum was worse than yesterday. They had her hooked up to a heart monitor, nasal oxygen on her and several different lines and things going in to her. She looked much weaker than yesterday, much sleepier, and she was having more nasty puss-y discharge from her nose than yesterday. Ben said hi and then went down to the cafe for a coffee - St Georges helpfully has an M&S food hall and cafe, which is a real bonus and all round fabulous idea - and Phil and I dumped our bags at the end of the bed, and then went through mum's post with her and read to her from BBC History magazine, which was all I had on me.

After a bit, one of the doctors came over and wanted to speak with me and Phil, so we dropped everything and went with her to a private room. A nurse got me a hot drink and really I should have known. That is never ever a good sign.

What the doctor had to say was incredibly hard for Phil and I to hear. What she wanted to do was tell us where we were up to today, and discuss with us a Do Not Resuscitate order.

She explained to us that while mum's blood sugar was much better (down to 11), she was much much worse than she had been 24 hours earlier. Mum's heart is getting very weak and mum herself is very tired. And she didn't mean that in a "she'll sleep and wake up refreshed" way, but in a "probably wanting to die" sort of way. And mum herself said later that she was very tired. Mum's resting heart rate is between 130 and 170bpm and the doctor thought it quite likely that at some point over the weekend it would stop. She also said that mum was in a lot of pain, and had been put on a morphine infusion earlier in the day to deal with the pain (previously she was on 30mg Codeine).

The hardest bit to hear was that she didn't think that mum's quality of life would get any better, even if the tumour does shrink a little bit (and the likelihood is that even if they can pull her through this, she will probably not be fit enough for radiotherapy), and she will continue to be in a lot of pain. She said that the consultants - Mr Mady, Mr Williamson and another (Mr Lee?) had met, and felt that the best and kindest thing would be not to resuscitate mum if her heart did stop. Phil and I were left to talk, and we called mum's brother and my aunt (dad's sister) and we all agreed that a DNR was the kindest thing that we could do. We (me and Phil) felt, and still feel, that to bring her back for more pain and suffering and poor quality of life is really just selfishness on our part. So we told the staff that we didn't want them to try and bring her back if her heart or breathing stop.

About 45 mins after the doctor had taken Phil and I aside, and when I finally could think about anything again, I found that my bag, that I'd stupidly dropped at the end of mum's bed earlier had gone missing. Phil's was still there. We searched the ward for it, and couldn't find it. The nursing staff were horrified and reported it to security, and I spent the next hour searching for my bag, reporting the theft and cancelling my cards. In the morning I need to call the DVLA.

There was nothing especially of value in there - just my notebooks (which I'm sad, especially as there were some untyped up stories) to lose) and my backpack (which I'm very sad to lose, especially given it had lots of keyrings I'd collected and things on it which made it an individual thing), and my purse, which had next to no actual money in it, just awkward things like cards and my driving licence in it. But the hour I spent having to report the loss and cancel the cards was an hour I couldn't spend with my critically ill mum, and if she dies tonight I really don't know how I could ever forgive the person who took it.

Mum's partner dropped by during the evening and we told him too. He was very emotional and gave back his key as he left. It was all pretty awful.

We ended up staying past the end of visiting hours, and the staff were very accommodating and left us be. We ended up telling mum and though she hadn't been spoken to explicitly (that she can remember, she's spent most of today pretty much asleep) she didn't seem at all surprised, or even terribly upset. We said that the DNR is ultimately her decision, as despite the sleepiness, her mind is still sharp. She said she agreed with our decision.

We told her how much we love her, and how proud we are of her, and how brilliant she's been and kissed her a lot. She said how much she loves us. We asked if she wanted us to stay and she said no.

So we came home. Via my aunties, who made us drinks and listened to us go through it logically. Ben drove home, which is good because I'm not sure I was capable.

Writing it all out now, it probably sounds a good deal more calm than it was. It involved much more intermittent crying from everyone (except mum) than I state here. Now I'm rather calmer. Still fairly near tears but oddly numb.

Today was awful. Really awful. Really really awful. And there's only a slim chance it will get better soon. Thank you to everyone who has sent thoughts and prayers. They're helping keep me afloat right now. More of the same please.

ETA: 12/07/11 No longer filtered
lizziec: (animals - gerbil - stan eating)
I slept the clock around last night. I'd gone to bed at 1am on Sunday night and got up at 5:30 and was clearly shattered by the end of the day as I fell asleep at about 10pm and woke up at around 10am, feeling much better, though from there I've become progressively fed up, grumpy and down. I suppose it's just one of those days.

Mum was released from the Day Surgery Unit at around 2 or 3pm yesterday feeling "as if [she] could run a mile". I suppose that's uber hospital drugs for you. The doctor took several samples of the tumour and while he was there he cleared out a bunch of gunk (mostly pus as I understand it) from mum's sinuses, so she feels much less congested at least, though it hasn't helped with any of the major tumour symptoms (the numbness and muscle weakness in her face, eye, nose, mouth; difficulty eating; deafness in one ear; shaking [a newish symptom] etc), it has slowed the perma-nosebleed to almost nothing, which I think is a great relief to us. Mr Tesco delivered some supplies with the groceries (namely micropore and gauze) so if it starts again we can rig up our own nose sling in imitation of the one they rigged up for mum yesterday at the hospital.

Results of the biopsy are due Thursday and my aunt (who has worked at St Georges and still volunteers there) told me yesterday that she was arranging everything. She's scouted out the best dropping off place, is arranging for a wheelchair to meet us there in case mum's unsteady on her feet (she's needed a wheelchair the last two times we've been to hospital) and tracked down the medical receptionist/admin type person who deals with the specific clinic and they're making sure that everything that is needed is there as a favour to my aunt. I guess knowing someone really can make a difference, and let's be frank - having a medical receptionist/secretary/admin person on your side can make a real difference.

While mum was feeling good I managed to have a couple of conversations with her about stuff that needed to be done, people to see and phone calls to make. It was apparently the perfect time as she felt like listening and was also feeling pessmistic about her prognosis, which while not ideal, meant that she gave some of my ideas the thought they at least deserved.

Got a response from Careline (attached to Diabetes UK) today, who I contacted yesterday with a panicked enquiry about the stupid diabetic nurses' comments that all weight loss was good when it came to type 2. Careline basically agreed with Macmillan (and directed me to them) about how uncontrolled, cancer related weight loss is bad and mum should see about getting referred to a proper, specialist dietician as a priority. It's been added to a list of things to ask her GP about when she next sees him (along with asking for different/better anti-emetics as the ones she has don't seem to work well and make her very sleepy). Take that stupid diabetes nurse!

As I mentioned I seem to have spent a good deal of this afternoon getting wound up with various things and increasingly fed up. Not entirely sure why everything is getting to me today, but it's not helpful. At one point I had a long list of things I was annoyed and fed up about. Thankfully reeling the list off to [livejournal.com profile] benc over the phone and a lesser list to [livejournal.com profile] red_pill in person helped a little.

Pondering going home (Canterbury) on Thursday night, but it all depends on what happens on Thursday's ENT appointment. I'm finding it difficult to see past that at the moment, which I suppose (looking at it objectively) isn't helping my mood much.

Phil's first driving lesson tomorrow, which is rather scary. Coulsdon and Wallington, you have been warned. Stay off the roads :P

ETA: 12/07/11 No longer filtered
lizziec: (animals - duckling-bum)
Not updated this for a few days (a week?), owing to being very busy indeed. Ben arrived on Wednesday night and took me out to dinner (and was generally fabulous the entire time he was here), and we spent most of Thursday and Friday sorting stuff out for mum's birthday, doing various errands and helping mum celebrate her birthday, before getting back to Canterbury late on Friday night for the rest of our weekend. Mum had a passable few days that week, though had a huge headache on Friday night that necessitated calling the doctor for some stronger painkillers than she had been taking (uber co-codamol, as the Tramadol the hospital gave her makes her feel sick). The headache thing worried me a bit as it brought to the forefront of my mind my worries about what a highly aggressive tumour (the drs at the hospital said it was because of the speed it had caused symptoms and degeneration in function in her face, though as of yet, we still don't know what it is) has been doing in the weeks between the first diagnosis of a tumour and now. I keep worrying that the gap between then and now will mean that a treatable tumour will have become terminal in the meantime. Which is silly, because I'm worrying about things that a) I have no control over and b) haven't even come to pass yet.

The MRI is scheduled for today at 12:15 and I'm hoping I can get mum to the hospital and back without her being sick. Attacks of sickness and nausea are becoming more frequent and I think they may be related to the tumour(s). Of all the symptoms mum has, this is the one I struggle with most. I hate vomit. It makes me want to vomit. Yesterday mum was sick several times and it took me 10 mins and nearly losing the contents of my own stomach 5 or 6 times before I got it from the bowl into the loo. It was ok so long as I wasn't looking at it. No nausea or retching as long as I had my eyes shut or it in a different room, but it's hardly a valid strategy for anything other than getting vomit over the floor between the living room and downstairs loo. Once the bowl was cleared of vomit it was fine - no retching or anything while I cleaned it out with water and then dettol'd it. I know there's probably a good deal more vomit in my future and it's one of the things that worries me a lot. Rather pathetic I know. In the great scheme of things it's not really that bad, but I really can't deal with it. I assume that I will get better at dealing with it. I hope I do, for mum's sake anyway.

Mum saw the diabetic nurse yesterday for a routine review and asked some questions I'd asked her to ask and it seems that the diabetic nurse was about as much use as a chocolate teapot. Mum was diagnosed with type 2 just before the symptoms of the tumour became apparent, so the treatment of the type 2 features in the complicated mess of trying to get some calories in to mum. I've probably mentioned before that the tumour on her cheekbone makes it hard for her to eat, especially anything hard, and makes eating extremely slow and hard work. On top of this, which makes her disinclined to eat, is the nausea and vomiting, which makes it extremely difficult to tempt her appetite. She's losing a lot of weight, which I suppose is good from the type 2 diabetes POV but I don't think she's losing it in the right way. She's barely eating, sometimes not keeping down what she does eat and so it's just melting off her. I'm worried that she won't have the energy to deal with whatever treatment she has for the cancer and that she will get malnourished. Sometimes when she's been sick the only thing she feels like eating(or that she can eat) is something that is bad from a diabetes POV like carrot cake, which then gives her the energy to eat something better for her. The only fruit she can manage is raspberries, grapes and blueberries. It's not really ideal.

The diabetic nurse said that if that was all she could manage (the carrot cake type thing) then she should eat that, but it was better if she could manage something like soup and bread. Which is what we were doing, but I feel as much in the dark as to how to deal with mum's nutrition problems as I did before, and I'm angry and upset about that. I got more help from my Auntie Pat (type 2 for years and years) who said that mum was eating so little the sugars issue didn't really feature too high and I should just get calories in to her where and when I could. Really I shouldn't be getting more helpful and less wishy washy advice from my aunt, who is not a medical professional than from a nurse with a speciality in that area.

Gah, it's all so complicated :(

ETA: 12/07/11 No longer filtered
lizziec: (animals - duckling-bum)
Not updated this for a few days (a week?), owing to being very busy indeed. Ben arrived on Wednesday night and took me out to dinner (and was generally fabulous the entire time he was here), and we spent most of Thursday and Friday sorting stuff out for mum's birthday, doing various errands and helping mum celebrate her birthday, before getting back to Canterbury late on Friday night for the rest of our weekend. Mum had a passable few days that week, though had a huge headache on Friday night that necessitated calling the doctor for some stronger painkillers than she had been taking (uber co-codamol, as the Tramadol the hospital gave her makes her feel sick). The headache thing worried me a bit as it brought to the forefront of my mind my worries about what a highly aggressive tumour (the drs at the hospital said it was because of the speed it had caused symptoms and degeneration in function in her face, though as of yet, we still don't know what it is) has been doing in the weeks between the first diagnosis of a tumour and now. I keep worrying that the gap between then and now will mean that a treatable tumour will have become terminal in the meantime. Which is silly, because I'm worrying about things that a) I have no control over and b) haven't even come to pass yet.

The MRI is scheduled for today at 12:15 and I'm hoping I can get mum to the hospital and back without her being sick. Attacks of sickness and nausea are becoming more frequent and I think they may be related to the tumour(s). Of all the symptoms mum has, this is the one I struggle with most. I hate vomit. It makes me want to vomit. Yesterday mum was sick several times and it took me 10 mins and nearly losing the contents of my own stomach 5 or 6 times before I got it from the bowl into the loo. It was ok so long as I wasn't looking at it. No nausea or retching as long as I had my eyes shut or it in a different room, but it's hardly a valid strategy for anything other than getting vomit over the floor between the living room and downstairs loo. Once the bowl was cleared of vomit it was fine - no retching or anything while I cleaned it out with water and then dettol'd it. I know there's probably a good deal more vomit in my future and it's one of the things that worries me a lot. Rather pathetic I know. In the great scheme of things it's not really that bad, but I really can't deal with it. I assume that I will get better at dealing with it. I hope I do, for mum's sake anyway.

Mum saw the diabetic nurse yesterday for a routine review and asked some questions I'd asked her to ask and it seems that the diabetic nurse was about as much use as a chocolate teapot. Mum was diagnosed with type 2 just before the symptoms of the tumour became apparent, so the treatment of the type 2 features in the complicated mess of trying to get some calories in to mum. I've probably mentioned before that the tumour on her cheekbone makes it hard for her to eat, especially anything hard, and makes eating extremely slow and hard work. On top of this, which makes her disinclined to eat, is the nausea and vomiting, which makes it extremely difficult to tempt her appetite. She's losing a lot of weight, which I suppose is good from the type 2 diabetes POV but I don't think she's losing it in the right way. She's barely eating, sometimes not keeping down what she does eat and so it's just melting off her. I'm worried that she won't have the energy to deal with whatever treatment she has for the cancer and that she will get malnourished. Sometimes when she's been sick the only thing she feels like eating(or that she can eat) is something that is bad from a diabetes POV like carrot cake, which then gives her the energy to eat something better for her. The only fruit she can manage is raspberries, grapes and blueberries. It's not really ideal.

The diabetic nurse said that if that was all she could manage (the carrot cake type thing) then she should eat that, but it was better if she could manage something like soup and bread. Which is what we were doing, but I feel as much in the dark as to how to deal with mum's nutrition problems as I did before, and I'm angry and upset about that. I got more help from my Auntie Pat (type 2 for years and years) who said that mum was eating so little the sugars issue didn't really feature too high and I should just get calories in to her where and when I could. Really I shouldn't be getting more helpful and less wishy washy advice from my aunt, who is not a medical professional than from a nurse with a speciality in that area.

Gah, it's all so complicated :(

ETA: 12/07/11 No longer filtered
lizziec: (animals - duckling-bum)
Not updated this for a few days (a week?), owing to being very busy indeed. Ben arrived on Wednesday night and took me out to dinner (and was generally fabulous the entire time he was here), and we spent most of Thursday and Friday sorting stuff out for mum's birthday, doing various errands and helping mum celebrate her birthday, before getting back to Canterbury late on Friday night for the rest of our weekend. Mum had a passable few days that week, though had a huge headache on Friday night that necessitated calling the doctor for some stronger painkillers than she had been taking (uber co-codamol, as the Tramadol the hospital gave her makes her feel sick). The headache thing worried me a bit as it brought to the forefront of my mind my worries about what a highly aggressive tumour (the drs at the hospital said it was because of the speed it had caused symptoms and degeneration in function in her face, though as of yet, we still don't know what it is) has been doing in the weeks between the first diagnosis of a tumour and now. I keep worrying that the gap between then and now will mean that a treatable tumour will have become terminal in the meantime. Which is silly, because I'm worrying about things that a) I have no control over and b) haven't even come to pass yet.

The MRI is scheduled for today at 12:15 and I'm hoping I can get mum to the hospital and back without her being sick. Attacks of sickness and nausea are becoming more frequent and I think they may be related to the tumour(s). Of all the symptoms mum has, this is the one I struggle with most. I hate vomit. It makes me want to vomit. Yesterday mum was sick several times and it took me 10 mins and nearly losing the contents of my own stomach 5 or 6 times before I got it from the bowl into the loo. It was ok so long as I wasn't looking at it. No nausea or retching as long as I had my eyes shut or it in a different room, but it's hardly a valid strategy for anything other than getting vomit over the floor between the living room and downstairs loo. Once the bowl was cleared of vomit it was fine - no retching or anything while I cleaned it out with water and then dettol'd it. I know there's probably a good deal more vomit in my future and it's one of the things that worries me a lot. Rather pathetic I know. In the great scheme of things it's not really that bad, but I really can't deal with it. I assume that I will get better at dealing with it. I hope I do, for mum's sake anyway.

Mum saw the diabetic nurse yesterday for a routine review and asked some questions I'd asked her to ask and it seems that the diabetic nurse was about as much use as a chocolate teapot. Mum was diagnosed with type 2 just before the symptoms of the tumour became apparent, so the treatment of the type 2 features in the complicated mess of trying to get some calories in to mum. I've probably mentioned before that the tumour on her cheekbone makes it hard for her to eat, especially anything hard, and makes eating extremely slow and hard work. On top of this, which makes her disinclined to eat, is the nausea and vomiting, which makes it extremely difficult to tempt her appetite. She's losing a lot of weight, which I suppose is good from the type 2 diabetes POV but I don't think she's losing it in the right way. She's barely eating, sometimes not keeping down what she does eat and so it's just melting off her. I'm worried that she won't have the energy to deal with whatever treatment she has for the cancer and that she will get malnourished. Sometimes when she's been sick the only thing she feels like eating(or that she can eat) is something that is bad from a diabetes POV like carrot cake, which then gives her the energy to eat something better for her. The only fruit she can manage is raspberries, grapes and blueberries. It's not really ideal.

The diabetic nurse said that if that was all she could manage (the carrot cake type thing) then she should eat that, but it was better if she could manage something like soup and bread. Which is what we were doing, but I feel as much in the dark as to how to deal with mum's nutrition problems as I did before, and I'm angry and upset about that. I got more help from my Auntie Pat (type 2 for years and years) who said that mum was eating so little the sugars issue didn't really feature too high and I should just get calories in to her where and when I could. Really I shouldn't be getting more helpful and less wishy washy advice from my aunt, who is not a medical professional than from a nurse with a speciality in that area.

Gah, it's all so complicated :(

ETA: 12/07/11 No longer filtered
lizziec: (apod - milkyway)
I was watching Newsnight just now and there were some politics experts talking about the new Counter Terrorism Bill, which is going to be voted on by MPs next week. There are lots of things in the proposed bill which make me angry, and I'm not going to go in to that right now, but the major thing being discussed tonight was the clause of holding suspects without trial for 42 days (the current is 28 days and the highest in the world already). What made me especially angry tonight, livid in fact, was the man who basically stated that the bill with 42 days would probably pass because most of the Labour MPs who would rebel feel that they have caused Gordon Brown enough trouble right now and that the bad headlines would damage their party. There are just no words for how angry that makes me.

The idea that a flawed bill with a hugely flawed detention without trial limit would be allowed through because some people feel that they need to conform for the good of their party and are not willing to stand up for what they believe in (and the fact they were considering rebelling in the first place tells me that they think this is wrong) makes me really angry. What a ridiculous reason for letting this bill though. I could almost respect them if they thought it was the right thing to do but just because they think they've caused enough trouble for now? It strikes me that it is an inherently bad law if the best reason for passing it that someone voting for it can come up with is that they don't want to rock the boat any more.

ARGH!

AngryAngryAngry.
lizziec: (apod - milkyway)
I was watching Newsnight just now and there were some politics experts talking about the new Counter Terrorism Bill, which is going to be voted on by MPs next week. There are lots of things in the proposed bill which make me angry, and I'm not going to go in to that right now, but the major thing being discussed tonight was the clause of holding suspects without trial for 42 days (the current is 28 days and the highest in the world already). What made me especially angry tonight, livid in fact, was the man who basically stated that the bill with 42 days would probably pass because most of the Labour MPs who would rebel feel that they have caused Gordon Brown enough trouble right now and that the bad headlines would damage their party. There are just no words for how angry that makes me.

The idea that a flawed bill with a hugely flawed detention without trial limit would be allowed through because some people feel that they need to conform for the good of their party and are not willing to stand up for what they believe in (and the fact they were considering rebelling in the first place tells me that they think this is wrong) makes me really angry. What a ridiculous reason for letting this bill though. I could almost respect them if they thought it was the right thing to do but just because they think they've caused enough trouble for now? It strikes me that it is an inherently bad law if the best reason for passing it that someone voting for it can come up with is that they don't want to rock the boat any more.

ARGH!

AngryAngryAngry.
lizziec: (apod - milkyway)
I was watching Newsnight just now and there were some politics experts talking about the new Counter Terrorism Bill, which is going to be voted on by MPs next week. There are lots of things in the proposed bill which make me angry, and I'm not going to go in to that right now, but the major thing being discussed tonight was the clause of holding suspects without trial for 42 days (the current is 28 days and the highest in the world already). What made me especially angry tonight, livid in fact, was the man who basically stated that the bill with 42 days would probably pass because most of the Labour MPs who would rebel feel that they have caused Gordon Brown enough trouble right now and that the bad headlines would damage their party. There are just no words for how angry that makes me.

The idea that a flawed bill with a hugely flawed detention without trial limit would be allowed through because some people feel that they need to conform for the good of their party and are not willing to stand up for what they believe in (and the fact they were considering rebelling in the first place tells me that they think this is wrong) makes me really angry. What a ridiculous reason for letting this bill though. I could almost respect them if they thought it was the right thing to do but just because they think they've caused enough trouble for now? It strikes me that it is an inherently bad law if the best reason for passing it that someone voting for it can come up with is that they don't want to rock the boat any more.

ARGH!

AngryAngryAngry.
lizziec: (toys - efelant and lion)
Since our holiday in Skegness in September I've increasingly noted younger and younger people in mobility scooters who do not appear to need them. Often I cannot confirm this suspicion, but I believe I did so tonight on the way back from the Eurostar IVT thing (we're home btw :D The last simulation ran on time. Still bloody knackered though and only got back about 10 mins ago - another two hour drive :(). Anyway, we were changing trains at East Croydon when a guy on a mobility scooter (and not a small economy model either) wearing a sort of shell suit tracksuit and a hat with lots of badges on it comes along, followed by a guy with a ramp who works for South Eastern or whatever they are this week. The guy in the scooter was youngish and looked like a bit of a waster TBH but I gave him the benefit of the doubt. The train came and he scooted on with the help of the ramp, blocking that whole entrance and parked himself there. Due to the size of his scooter that entrance bay was now unusable for the trip (at rush hour). Clearly at some point during the journey he realised he'd need to get out again so he sets to a million point turn to get the massive scooter pointing the other way. Eventally he backs himself into an impossible situation - he couldn't turn anymore because there wasn't enough space.

He didn't wait for or ask for help.

He got off the scooter and lifted it up and turned it around.

I was left with a dirty taste in my mouth and feeling rather disgusted at what I had witnessed. It's people like him who give people like my Father in Law who uses one because he can't walk a bad name/reputation.

Gragh.
lizziec: (toys - efelant and lion)
Since our holiday in Skegness in September I've increasingly noted younger and younger people in mobility scooters who do not appear to need them. Often I cannot confirm this suspicion, but I believe I did so tonight on the way back from the Eurostar IVT thing (we're home btw :D The last simulation ran on time. Still bloody knackered though and only got back about 10 mins ago - another two hour drive :(). Anyway, we were changing trains at East Croydon when a guy on a mobility scooter (and not a small economy model either) wearing a sort of shell suit tracksuit and a hat with lots of badges on it comes along, followed by a guy with a ramp who works for South Eastern or whatever they are this week. The guy in the scooter was youngish and looked like a bit of a waster TBH but I gave him the benefit of the doubt. The train came and he scooted on with the help of the ramp, blocking that whole entrance and parked himself there. Due to the size of his scooter that entrance bay was now unusable for the trip (at rush hour). Clearly at some point during the journey he realised he'd need to get out again so he sets to a million point turn to get the massive scooter pointing the other way. Eventally he backs himself into an impossible situation - he couldn't turn anymore because there wasn't enough space.

He didn't wait for or ask for help.

He got off the scooter and lifted it up and turned it around.

I was left with a dirty taste in my mouth and feeling rather disgusted at what I had witnessed. It's people like him who give people like my Father in Law who uses one because he can't walk a bad name/reputation.

Gragh.
lizziec: (toys - efelant and lion)
Since our holiday in Skegness in September I've increasingly noted younger and younger people in mobility scooters who do not appear to need them. Often I cannot confirm this suspicion, but I believe I did so tonight on the way back from the Eurostar IVT thing (we're home btw :D The last simulation ran on time. Still bloody knackered though and only got back about 10 mins ago - another two hour drive :(). Anyway, we were changing trains at East Croydon when a guy on a mobility scooter (and not a small economy model either) wearing a sort of shell suit tracksuit and a hat with lots of badges on it comes along, followed by a guy with a ramp who works for South Eastern or whatever they are this week. The guy in the scooter was youngish and looked like a bit of a waster TBH but I gave him the benefit of the doubt. The train came and he scooted on with the help of the ramp, blocking that whole entrance and parked himself there. Due to the size of his scooter that entrance bay was now unusable for the trip (at rush hour). Clearly at some point during the journey he realised he'd need to get out again so he sets to a million point turn to get the massive scooter pointing the other way. Eventally he backs himself into an impossible situation - he couldn't turn anymore because there wasn't enough space.

He didn't wait for or ask for help.

He got off the scooter and lifted it up and turned it around.

I was left with a dirty taste in my mouth and feeling rather disgusted at what I had witnessed. It's people like him who give people like my Father in Law who uses one because he can't walk a bad name/reputation.

Gragh.
lizziec: (potterpuffs - lupin read book)
A couple of rants here which need to be got out of my system. Firstly about the pillock in a yellow (bronze?) Honda with the registration number Y106 BKJ who blocked me in last night.



Mine is the little red clio in the middle. The gap between the enormous Ford and the Honda was not enough for me to get out. I was stuck there for ages and I was supposed to be going out. Thank goodness I didn't have to be somewhere at a set time.

Grr! So angry!

The other victim(s) of my wrath are the parents of Blean Primary School children. You would think that the little darlings cannot walk given the proximity to the school the parents feel they have to park. The ones that park at the Sports Ground car park are bad enough, and the ones that park at Nickle Court are even worse (this is the closest PW court to the school) but the ones that feel they have to drive right up to the Crab and Winkle way and the gates of the now closed old car park? Sickening.

Even worse are the ones on the Whitstable Road causing traffic to go single file at dropping off and picking up time (thus causing a major problem on those occasions I have seen an ambulance, police car or fire engine trying to get past). The bigger problem of this is that often the parents and children are crossing the road from behind cars, actually...no, not cars. Giant 4x4s. This may be safe for the poor ikkle children who cannot walk more than 50yards from the entrance of their school but for those of us who have to cross it makes it much more dangerous. The two times a day I have to cross that road with Becky and Paul are terrifying.

Those parents who feel the need to park so close piss me off so much.

GRRR!
lizziec: (lego l)
So the House of Lords have rejected the Government proposal to link ID cards to passports for the third time.

This means that the Government will potentially use the Parliament Act to force it through without the approval of the Lords.

I hope not, despite what Charles Clarke says ("passports were "voluntary documents" that no-one was forced to renew" - umm, except when you need to leave the country that is), the linking of ID cards to passports is creeping compulsion. If you are forced to get one when you renew your passport then eventually practically everyone will have one...except for your terrorists, the people they are designed to stop, because they may not have a British passport to start with, they probably won't be worried about them even if they do [after all, they didn't stop Madrid] and they probably have access to forgers who can make the sodding passports without the need for this ID card rubbish.

Best quote of the night came from the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords. From the BBC News article:

"The Liberal Democrat leader in the Upper House, Lord McNally, said the House of Lords must retain its right to say "no".

"There is the Parliament Act and that is the right of the elected House to have its way," he said.

"But this House must retain the right to say 'not in our name'."
"

It's certainly not in mine.

(P.S. For those of you who don't read my teacher blog I have a job interview! :D)
lizziec: (lego l)
So the House of Lords have rejected the Government proposal to link ID cards to passports for the third time.

This means that the Government will potentially use the Parliament Act to force it through without the approval of the Lords.

I hope not, despite what Charles Clarke says ("passports were "voluntary documents" that no-one was forced to renew" - umm, except when you need to leave the country that is), the linking of ID cards to passports is creeping compulsion. If you are forced to get one when you renew your passport then eventually practically everyone will have one...except for your terrorists, the people they are designed to stop, because they may not have a British passport to start with, they probably won't be worried about them even if they do [after all, they didn't stop Madrid] and they probably have access to forgers who can make the sodding passports without the need for this ID card rubbish.

Best quote of the night came from the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords. From the BBC News article:

"The Liberal Democrat leader in the Upper House, Lord McNally, said the House of Lords must retain its right to say "no".

"There is the Parliament Act and that is the right of the elected House to have its way," he said.

"But this House must retain the right to say 'not in our name'."
"

It's certainly not in mine.

(P.S. For those of you who don't read my teacher blog I have a job interview! :D)
lizziec: (lego l)
So the House of Lords have rejected the Government proposal to link ID cards to passports for the third time.

This means that the Government will potentially use the Parliament Act to force it through without the approval of the Lords.

I hope not, despite what Charles Clarke says ("passports were "voluntary documents" that no-one was forced to renew" - umm, except when you need to leave the country that is), the linking of ID cards to passports is creeping compulsion. If you are forced to get one when you renew your passport then eventually practically everyone will have one...except for your terrorists, the people they are designed to stop, because they may not have a British passport to start with, they probably won't be worried about them even if they do [after all, they didn't stop Madrid] and they probably have access to forgers who can make the sodding passports without the need for this ID card rubbish.

Best quote of the night came from the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords. From the BBC News article:

"The Liberal Democrat leader in the Upper House, Lord McNally, said the House of Lords must retain its right to say "no".

"There is the Parliament Act and that is the right of the elected House to have its way," he said.

"But this House must retain the right to say 'not in our name'."
"

It's certainly not in mine.

(P.S. For those of you who don't read my teacher blog I have a job interview! :D)
lizziec: (me - daddy and baby lizzie)
[Poll #688924]

Please post your own views in comments below

This is why I posted the poll and want your views - I apologise for the gross generalisations that follow )
lizziec: (me - daddy and baby lizzie)
[Poll #688924]

Please post your own views in comments below

This is why I posted the poll and want your views - I apologise for the gross generalisations that follow )
lizziec: (me - daddy and baby lizzie)
[Poll #688924]

Please post your own views in comments below

This is why I posted the poll and want your views - I apologise for the gross generalisations that follow )
lizziec: (potterpuffs - dumbledore flesh wound)
The BBC news story about last night's ID card vote.

It makes me really quite stompy, and I know that I am not the only one.

So now we get a seperate law before it is made compulsorary. Whoopdedoo. How is that going to help when from 2009 you will not be allowed to get a passport without also getting an ID card. If you cannot leave the country without a passport and you cannot get a passport without getting an ID card it will be a short time before everyone has one anyway.

As for the "it will stop terrorism" issue, don't even get me started. The Madrid bombers had valid Spanish ID, the July bombers were all UK citizens. I do not see how having ID cards would have stopped these atrocities.

It will stop identity theft? I don't think so. It will only be a short amount of time before this too will be forged, except now they will be supposedly fool-proof. If your identity is stolen with a forged card then how long will it take you to get it back - if someone has one of these pieces of plastic then they must be who they say they are.

Let's not even mention how little I trust this or any other government with biometric data on me, let alone data on me stored on one of those Oh-So-Reliable government IT projects.

Oh for pity's sake. How stupid do the Government think we are?

The report is full of little quotes from various organisations. Let's start with the one from Home Office minister Andy Burnham. Support, apparently is "Solidifying" and the majority of a whole 31 MPs means that "We think it gives the vote a very clear mandate going forward".

Let's now examine what "mandate" means a clear authorization or direction...the authorization to act given by a constituency to its elected representative (sourced from dictionary.com)

So the fact that a government, who a minority of the UK voted for, have won a vote gives them a mandate - we, the people, apparently support them.

Except, oh wait! We don't! Shock horror.

According to a poll by yougov if the scheme cost £6bn - "a figure that some ministers have talked about" - then public support for it was at "2 to 1 against", and when you move to the figures that the LSE* and others have been talking about, £10bn+ then we are at a figure of "8 to 1 against"

What this tells me is that the esteemed Home Office Minister has a different understanding of mandate. A slim majority of a government a minority elected into office voted for something that at least two thirds of the country are against.

Doesn't sound like a mandate to me.

*not even mentioning that the LSE now refuses to release another figure on the cost owing to the high levels of secrecy from the government about how the project will go ahead. Many officials from LSE have been scathing of planning for this project owing to "contradictions, guesswork and wishful thinking" on the part of the Government.

[Edit] This is quite interesting for looking at the views of the public on ID cards
lizziec: (potterpuffs - dumbledore flesh wound)
The BBC news story about last night's ID card vote.

It makes me really quite stompy, and I know that I am not the only one.

So now we get a seperate law before it is made compulsorary. Whoopdedoo. How is that going to help when from 2009 you will not be allowed to get a passport without also getting an ID card. If you cannot leave the country without a passport and you cannot get a passport without getting an ID card it will be a short time before everyone has one anyway.

As for the "it will stop terrorism" issue, don't even get me started. The Madrid bombers had valid Spanish ID, the July bombers were all UK citizens. I do not see how having ID cards would have stopped these atrocities.

It will stop identity theft? I don't think so. It will only be a short amount of time before this too will be forged, except now they will be supposedly fool-proof. If your identity is stolen with a forged card then how long will it take you to get it back - if someone has one of these pieces of plastic then they must be who they say they are.

Let's not even mention how little I trust this or any other government with biometric data on me, let alone data on me stored on one of those Oh-So-Reliable government IT projects.

Oh for pity's sake. How stupid do the Government think we are?

The report is full of little quotes from various organisations. Let's start with the one from Home Office minister Andy Burnham. Support, apparently is "Solidifying" and the majority of a whole 31 MPs means that "We think it gives the vote a very clear mandate going forward".

Let's now examine what "mandate" means a clear authorization or direction...the authorization to act given by a constituency to its elected representative (sourced from dictionary.com)

So the fact that a government, who a minority of the UK voted for, have won a vote gives them a mandate - we, the people, apparently support them.

Except, oh wait! We don't! Shock horror.

According to a poll by yougov if the scheme cost £6bn - "a figure that some ministers have talked about" - then public support for it was at "2 to 1 against", and when you move to the figures that the LSE* and others have been talking about, £10bn+ then we are at a figure of "8 to 1 against"

What this tells me is that the esteemed Home Office Minister has a different understanding of mandate. A slim majority of a government a minority elected into office voted for something that at least two thirds of the country are against.

Doesn't sound like a mandate to me.

*not even mentioning that the LSE now refuses to release another figure on the cost owing to the high levels of secrecy from the government about how the project will go ahead. Many officials from LSE have been scathing of planning for this project owing to "contradictions, guesswork and wishful thinking" on the part of the Government.

[Edit] This is quite interesting for looking at the views of the public on ID cards
lizziec: (potterpuffs - dumbledore flesh wound)
The BBC news story about last night's ID card vote.

It makes me really quite stompy, and I know that I am not the only one.

So now we get a seperate law before it is made compulsorary. Whoopdedoo. How is that going to help when from 2009 you will not be allowed to get a passport without also getting an ID card. If you cannot leave the country without a passport and you cannot get a passport without getting an ID card it will be a short time before everyone has one anyway.

As for the "it will stop terrorism" issue, don't even get me started. The Madrid bombers had valid Spanish ID, the July bombers were all UK citizens. I do not see how having ID cards would have stopped these atrocities.

It will stop identity theft? I don't think so. It will only be a short amount of time before this too will be forged, except now they will be supposedly fool-proof. If your identity is stolen with a forged card then how long will it take you to get it back - if someone has one of these pieces of plastic then they must be who they say they are.

Let's not even mention how little I trust this or any other government with biometric data on me, let alone data on me stored on one of those Oh-So-Reliable government IT projects.

Oh for pity's sake. How stupid do the Government think we are?

The report is full of little quotes from various organisations. Let's start with the one from Home Office minister Andy Burnham. Support, apparently is "Solidifying" and the majority of a whole 31 MPs means that "We think it gives the vote a very clear mandate going forward".

Let's now examine what "mandate" means a clear authorization or direction...the authorization to act given by a constituency to its elected representative (sourced from dictionary.com)

So the fact that a government, who a minority of the UK voted for, have won a vote gives them a mandate - we, the people, apparently support them.

Except, oh wait! We don't! Shock horror.

According to a poll by yougov if the scheme cost £6bn - "a figure that some ministers have talked about" - then public support for it was at "2 to 1 against", and when you move to the figures that the LSE* and others have been talking about, £10bn+ then we are at a figure of "8 to 1 against"

What this tells me is that the esteemed Home Office Minister has a different understanding of mandate. A slim majority of a government a minority elected into office voted for something that at least two thirds of the country are against.

Doesn't sound like a mandate to me.

*not even mentioning that the LSE now refuses to release another figure on the cost owing to the high levels of secrecy from the government about how the project will go ahead. Many officials from LSE have been scathing of planning for this project owing to "contradictions, guesswork and wishful thinking" on the part of the Government.

[Edit] This is quite interesting for looking at the views of the public on ID cards
lizziec: (potterpuffs - ravenclaw)
"A man who wrongly parked in a disabled parking space at a supermarket had his throat cut by a genuine disabled driver, a court has heard."

I must admit, I can understand the sentiment, even if the disabled driver did go rather too far. Nothing pisses me off more than able bodied people parking in Disabled parking spaces, and usually most of the bays are filled with people like this.

Grr.
lizziec: (toys - ikeagiraffe)
I meant to post about this last night but I went to lie down at 8pm and only just woke up. Oops ;)

I spent a lot of time in the car yesterday listening to the radio*, about 3 hours to be exact, and I got increacingly irate at the way the "final hours of George Best" and the "death of George Best" (or as the BBC put it "Fans pay tribute to legend Best") were played out by the media.

I don't think this man's death should be seen as anything special. He was an alcoholic and apparently also abused his ex-wife. He lived a life of excess, paid the consequences for it, though got another chance with a liver transplant that he then wasted.

A liver transplant that could have saved someone else. Perhaps a young person. Perhaps a young mother or father with children, people who wouldn't have wasted that liver.

Grr.

Who did this man think he was? He may have been a great footballer (dunno, he was well before my time), but to me he appeared a selfish old man who assumed that the rules didn't apply to him. His death should not be greatly mourned by anyone but his family. This is even worse than the fuss over Diana (who was not a saint, I don't care how many of you like to imagine she was, grr), who at least acted as a stronger role model than Best.

What really frustrates me are all the comments on the BBC's "Have Your Say" thread about the passing of "the legendary footballer".

So many of them run like this:

"Northern Ireland's finest son. George Best was the BEST!"
"George was simply the best!! He will be remembered as a lovely man who could play a mighty fine game of football. God go with you George xxx"
and
"George has gone and will be emensily missed he is a real legend and no one will be to the same standard as him. I will miss him and i'm sure everyone else will as well!! :-("

Grr. There are times I dispair of the majority of this country >.<

I at least take some solace in the fact that all the comments that have been "reader reccommended" are along the lines of:

"A genius on the football pitch? Yes. Someone who deserves to rest in peace? Yes. Someone who deserves to be reverred? Not necessarily. This man had the chance to change his life with his liver transplant, and yet could not overcome his addiction. He should be a warning to everyone."
"To anyone under the age of 35, he was better known as an alcoholic than as a footballer. The news coverage has been totally out of proportion to his death."
"I am sad at the loss of a life, but I can't believe the hype surrounding George Best's death. There have been other, more worthy people, whose demise has gone relatively unreported and who, if given the chance of an extended life as George Best was through his transplant, would have not wasted it."
and
"Sad as anyone's passing is, I've been most disturbed by the almost way ghoulish way in which his passing has been reported in the press - the hour by hour updates, the "in his last hours" headlines. In a world where thousands of people in the mountains of Kashmir, in Niger and elsewhere are dying early and preventable deaths, lets not make the self-inflicted passing of a great footballer the top story of the day."

Although these comments are by far in the minority they have been the most reccommended. Maybe the majority of people are silent and with me on my thoughts after all.

I hope so.

*This is because I went to a prize giving evening at Phil's old school - seperate entry about that later
lizziec: (XKCD drunk)
I am at telehouse this weekend for a whole weekend and I must admit, it started rather badly.

Rant about disorganisation )

Which is why I was very glad when Philip offered to buy me lunch. He came on the DLR from Greenwich and we went back to Greenwich for a 'spoons, then back to his room where I fixed his HTML a bit :) After that we wandered back to East India Dock where I am based atm because we thought the DLR route was silly. Well, it is silly, but I admit, it's quicker than walking and certainly quicker than walking the route that Phil and I did. It was, however, a lovely walk with excellent company, and a really nice time was had by all. Except for: Rant about the little shit in Greenwich )

Anyway, I had a lovely time with Philip and am thinking about accompanying him to the Cenotaph tomorrow. Depends if I can be arsed or not ;)

At the moment I'm back in Telehouse watching the battle of Britain on my lappy (already watched The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp and Apollo 13 (thanks [livejournal.com profile] no1typo and [livejournal.com profile] manyfacesofjase respectively) but I suspect that by tomorrow I will have watched all the DVDs I brought with me. Sucks. Feel all warm and glowy from my walk across Docklands. Yay!

ANyway, off for some more tasteless food now. BBiab to update my OtherJournal(tm) with my teacher training doings ;)
lizziec: (XKCD drunk)
I am at telehouse this weekend for a whole weekend and I must admit, it started rather badly.

Rant about disorganisation )

Which is why I was very glad when Philip offered to buy me lunch. He came on the DLR from Greenwich and we went back to Greenwich for a 'spoons, then back to his room where I fixed his HTML a bit :) After that we wandered back to East India Dock where I am based atm because we thought the DLR route was silly. Well, it is silly, but I admit, it's quicker than walking and certainly quicker than walking the route that Phil and I did. It was, however, a lovely walk with excellent company, and a really nice time was had by all. Except for: Rant about the little shit in Greenwich )

Anyway, I had a lovely time with Philip and am thinking about accompanying him to the Cenotaph tomorrow. Depends if I can be arsed or not ;)

At the moment I'm back in Telehouse watching the battle of Britain on my lappy (already watched The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp and Apollo 13 (thanks [livejournal.com profile] no1typo and [livejournal.com profile] manyfacesofjase respectively) but I suspect that by tomorrow I will have watched all the DVDs I brought with me. Sucks. Feel all warm and glowy from my walk across Docklands. Yay!

ANyway, off for some more tasteless food now. BBiab to update my OtherJournal(tm) with my teacher training doings ;)
lizziec: (XKCD drunk)
I am at telehouse this weekend for a whole weekend and I must admit, it started rather badly.

Rant about disorganisation )

Which is why I was very glad when Philip offered to buy me lunch. He came on the DLR from Greenwich and we went back to Greenwich for a 'spoons, then back to his room where I fixed his HTML a bit :) After that we wandered back to East India Dock where I am based atm because we thought the DLR route was silly. Well, it is silly, but I admit, it's quicker than walking and certainly quicker than walking the route that Phil and I did. It was, however, a lovely walk with excellent company, and a really nice time was had by all. Except for: Rant about the little shit in Greenwich )

Anyway, I had a lovely time with Philip and am thinking about accompanying him to the Cenotaph tomorrow. Depends if I can be arsed or not ;)

At the moment I'm back in Telehouse watching the battle of Britain on my lappy (already watched The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp and Apollo 13 (thanks [livejournal.com profile] no1typo and [livejournal.com profile] manyfacesofjase respectively) but I suspect that by tomorrow I will have watched all the DVDs I brought with me. Sucks. Feel all warm and glowy from my walk across Docklands. Yay!

ANyway, off for some more tasteless food now. BBiab to update my OtherJournal(tm) with my teacher training doings ;)

Rant

7 July 2005 10:20 pm
lizziec: (Default)
To the person with the very very loud Fireworks who is letting them off somewhere in the vacinity of Canterbury,

I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I was trying to sleep. After the events of today your very loud explosion at 10:10PM was taken by a sleepy me to be some sort of terrorist attack on Canterbury Cathederal or something. I know this is completely irrational but I really was quite sleepy and not thinking straight and after today the terrorist thought was uppermost in my mind. Please die or be maimed by your stupid firework, or at least don't let any more off so I can go curl up in bed. You are an utter chav, you really really are.


Love

Lizzie

Rant

7 July 2005 10:20 pm
lizziec: (Default)
To the person with the very very loud Fireworks who is letting them off somewhere in the vacinity of Canterbury,

I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I was trying to sleep. After the events of today your very loud explosion at 10:10PM was taken by a sleepy me to be some sort of terrorist attack on Canterbury Cathederal or something. I know this is completely irrational but I really was quite sleepy and not thinking straight and after today the terrorist thought was uppermost in my mind. Please die or be maimed by your stupid firework, or at least don't let any more off so I can go curl up in bed. You are an utter chav, you really really are.


Love

Lizzie

Rant

7 July 2005 10:20 pm
lizziec: (Default)
To the person with the very very loud Fireworks who is letting them off somewhere in the vacinity of Canterbury,

I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I was trying to sleep. After the events of today your very loud explosion at 10:10PM was taken by a sleepy me to be some sort of terrorist attack on Canterbury Cathederal or something. I know this is completely irrational but I really was quite sleepy and not thinking straight and after today the terrorist thought was uppermost in my mind. Please die or be maimed by your stupid firework, or at least don't let any more off so I can go curl up in bed. You are an utter chav, you really really are.


Love

Lizzie
lizziec: (Default)
Those of you who get pissed off at politics would do best to ignore this one ;)

Today ex-MP Brian Sedgemore defected from Labour to the Liberal Democrats. I didn't really pay much attention to this story to begin with cos I didn't really care. Then [livejournal.com profile] metamoof pasted the link to his last speech in Parliament which was against Prevention of Terrorism Bill. I read it through and developed a whole hearted respect for this man. The speech is very strong stuff. It's certainly more than a little bit emotive.

The text of the speech )

I was really surprised. At the advanced age of 21 I am incredibly cynical about parliamentary debates and get easily bored by them, but reading this speech made my hair stand on end.

He compares the system of justice in this country to being akin to the one that "found favour with the South African Government at the time of apartheid", but for me the most powerful connotations come from a paragraph further down the page where he states: "Many Members have gone nap on the matter. They voted: first, to abolish trial by jury in less serious cases; secondly, to abolish trial by jury in more serious cases; thirdly, to approve an unlawful war; fourthly, to create a gulag at Belmarsh; and fifthly, to lock up innocent people in their homes. It is truly terrifying to imagine what those Members of Parliament will vote for next.I can describe all that only as new Labour's descent into hell, which is not a place where I want to be."

For me this conjures up images of the Nazi state, possibly because of the things I have been reading at the moment (including Lawrence Rees' excellent "Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution"), but it brings up a theme that is touched upon by book after book, time after time. The erosion of the rights of the Jews in Germany were so gradual that it seemed that to ride it out and wait was the best course. It couldn't last, people told themselves, things would get better and they wouldn't get much worse. History tells us these people were wrong, but hindsight is a beautiful thing. I will admit the analogy is somewhat harsh, but it also shows us what a dangerous road we are starting on.

Our Human Rights are being chipped away at so slowly that we barely notice it in the name of freedom from fear. First this right is eroded, then that, and then another. If this continues one day we will have nothing left. I want to say, here and now, that the attacks on the 11th September 2001 made me no more afraid of the world around me than I was before. In the wake of all that has happened since I have become more afraid of the actions of our government, at home and abroad, and that of the US than I have those of terrorists.

Something in Mr Sedgemore's speech has touched a chord with me. I will be voting in this election and I will be voting against the party that has eroded my rights as a human and as a citizen. I will be voting against the party that took us into a war I did not support under the premise of a lie. I will be voting against the party that has time and again shown themselves to be untrustworthy.

I feel motivated to vote, and I will not be denied my oportunity to speak out, even if it is what others proclaim as "a wasted vote" or "a vote that will help the Conservatives win".

I will use my vote to make my stand.
lizziec: (Default)
Those of you who get pissed off at politics would do best to ignore this one ;)

Today ex-MP Brian Sedgemore defected from Labour to the Liberal Democrats. I didn't really pay much attention to this story to begin with cos I didn't really care. Then [livejournal.com profile] metamoof pasted the link to his last speech in Parliament which was against Prevention of Terrorism Bill. I read it through and developed a whole hearted respect for this man. The speech is very strong stuff. It's certainly more than a little bit emotive.

The text of the speech )

I was really surprised. At the advanced age of 21 I am incredibly cynical about parliamentary debates and get easily bored by them, but reading this speech made my hair stand on end.

He compares the system of justice in this country to being akin to the one that "found favour with the South African Government at the time of apartheid", but for me the most powerful connotations come from a paragraph further down the page where he states: "Many Members have gone nap on the matter. They voted: first, to abolish trial by jury in less serious cases; secondly, to abolish trial by jury in more serious cases; thirdly, to approve an unlawful war; fourthly, to create a gulag at Belmarsh; and fifthly, to lock up innocent people in their homes. It is truly terrifying to imagine what those Members of Parliament will vote for next.I can describe all that only as new Labour's descent into hell, which is not a place where I want to be."

For me this conjures up images of the Nazi state, possibly because of the things I have been reading at the moment (including Lawrence Rees' excellent "Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution"), but it brings up a theme that is touched upon by book after book, time after time. The erosion of the rights of the Jews in Germany were so gradual that it seemed that to ride it out and wait was the best course. It couldn't last, people told themselves, things would get better and they wouldn't get much worse. History tells us these people were wrong, but hindsight is a beautiful thing. I will admit the analogy is somewhat harsh, but it also shows us what a dangerous road we are starting on.

Our Human Rights are being chipped away at so slowly that we barely notice it in the name of freedom from fear. First this right is eroded, then that, and then another. If this continues one day we will have nothing left. I want to say, here and now, that the attacks on the 11th September 2001 made me no more afraid of the world around me than I was before. In the wake of all that has happened since I have become more afraid of the actions of our government, at home and abroad, and that of the US than I have those of terrorists.

Something in Mr Sedgemore's speech has touched a chord with me. I will be voting in this election and I will be voting against the party that has eroded my rights as a human and as a citizen. I will be voting against the party that took us into a war I did not support under the premise of a lie. I will be voting against the party that has time and again shown themselves to be untrustworthy.

I feel motivated to vote, and I will not be denied my oportunity to speak out, even if it is what others proclaim as "a wasted vote" or "a vote that will help the Conservatives win".

I will use my vote to make my stand.
lizziec: (Default)
Those of you who get pissed off at politics would do best to ignore this one ;)

Today ex-MP Brian Sedgemore defected from Labour to the Liberal Democrats. I didn't really pay much attention to this story to begin with cos I didn't really care. Then [livejournal.com profile] metamoof pasted the link to his last speech in Parliament which was against Prevention of Terrorism Bill. I read it through and developed a whole hearted respect for this man. The speech is very strong stuff. It's certainly more than a little bit emotive.

The text of the speech )

I was really surprised. At the advanced age of 21 I am incredibly cynical about parliamentary debates and get easily bored by them, but reading this speech made my hair stand on end.

He compares the system of justice in this country to being akin to the one that "found favour with the South African Government at the time of apartheid", but for me the most powerful connotations come from a paragraph further down the page where he states: "Many Members have gone nap on the matter. They voted: first, to abolish trial by jury in less serious cases; secondly, to abolish trial by jury in more serious cases; thirdly, to approve an unlawful war; fourthly, to create a gulag at Belmarsh; and fifthly, to lock up innocent people in their homes. It is truly terrifying to imagine what those Members of Parliament will vote for next.I can describe all that only as new Labour's descent into hell, which is not a place where I want to be."

For me this conjures up images of the Nazi state, possibly because of the things I have been reading at the moment (including Lawrence Rees' excellent "Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution"), but it brings up a theme that is touched upon by book after book, time after time. The erosion of the rights of the Jews in Germany were so gradual that it seemed that to ride it out and wait was the best course. It couldn't last, people told themselves, things would get better and they wouldn't get much worse. History tells us these people were wrong, but hindsight is a beautiful thing. I will admit the analogy is somewhat harsh, but it also shows us what a dangerous road we are starting on.

Our Human Rights are being chipped away at so slowly that we barely notice it in the name of freedom from fear. First this right is eroded, then that, and then another. If this continues one day we will have nothing left. I want to say, here and now, that the attacks on the 11th September 2001 made me no more afraid of the world around me than I was before. In the wake of all that has happened since I have become more afraid of the actions of our government, at home and abroad, and that of the US than I have those of terrorists.

Something in Mr Sedgemore's speech has touched a chord with me. I will be voting in this election and I will be voting against the party that has eroded my rights as a human and as a citizen. I will be voting against the party that took us into a war I did not support under the premise of a lie. I will be voting against the party that has time and again shown themselves to be untrustworthy.

I feel motivated to vote, and I will not be denied my oportunity to speak out, even if it is what others proclaim as "a wasted vote" or "a vote that will help the Conservatives win".

I will use my vote to make my stand.
lizziec: (Default)
This morning [livejournal.com profile] benc pointed me at an article he had read via his RSS feeds that had appeared in the Observer. This article is the account of a British man who was detained in Guantanamo Bay for 33 Months and it is truly horrifying. I don't usually quote from the bible and those who know me best will know that I'm in a very confusing place right now wrt religion, but I feel John 8:7 sums up perfectly what the attitude of the Coalition should be in all this. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Everyone knows that no person or country can be perfect but that they should try as hard as they can to be beyond recrimination. In their "War Upon Terror" the "coalition" is doing things that makes them as bad as, if not worse than the people who committed the September 11th atrocities. Do they really think that by performing torture and denying people their basic human rights they are going to gain support? All they are doing is turning more and more people against them as a country and Bush's regieme.

If this is the price of freeing the world from terrorism I want no part of it.

Not In My Name
lizziec: (Default)
This morning [livejournal.com profile] benc pointed me at an article he had read via his RSS feeds that had appeared in the Observer. This article is the account of a British man who was detained in Guantanamo Bay for 33 Months and it is truly horrifying. I don't usually quote from the bible and those who know me best will know that I'm in a very confusing place right now wrt religion, but I feel John 8:7 sums up perfectly what the attitude of the Coalition should be in all this. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Everyone knows that no person or country can be perfect but that they should try as hard as they can to be beyond recrimination. In their "War Upon Terror" the "coalition" is doing things that makes them as bad as, if not worse than the people who committed the September 11th atrocities. Do they really think that by performing torture and denying people their basic human rights they are going to gain support? All they are doing is turning more and more people against them as a country and Bush's regieme.

If this is the price of freeing the world from terrorism I want no part of it.

Not In My Name
lizziec: (Default)
This morning [livejournal.com profile] benc pointed me at an article he had read via his RSS feeds that had appeared in the Observer. This article is the account of a British man who was detained in Guantanamo Bay for 33 Months and it is truly horrifying. I don't usually quote from the bible and those who know me best will know that I'm in a very confusing place right now wrt religion, but I feel John 8:7 sums up perfectly what the attitude of the Coalition should be in all this. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Everyone knows that no person or country can be perfect but that they should try as hard as they can to be beyond recrimination. In their "War Upon Terror" the "coalition" is doing things that makes them as bad as, if not worse than the people who committed the September 11th atrocities. Do they really think that by performing torture and denying people their basic human rights they are going to gain support? All they are doing is turning more and more people against them as a country and Bush's regieme.

If this is the price of freeing the world from terrorism I want no part of it.

Not In My Name
lizziec: (Default)

Pissed Off



"why?" I hear you ask.

I'll tell you.

I have a 5k word essay due in on Friday at 12pm. I looked for the books in the library (of which there is generally one copy of each text for a class of 15 all of whom will be writing the essay) at the end of last term and found they were all out on four week loan and not due back until this Wednesday. I found the books I could and put reservations on the others and sent an email to my tutor for this subject explaining the situation and asking if he had any of these texts that I could borrow for the holidays, mentioning that I could collect them from anywhere in the Canterbury area.

The email bounced because his email box was full.

Today I found him to ask

  1. Why the texts weren't in the short loans collection when there are so few of them and would clearly be in short supply

  2. Why a certain text wasn't in the library at all

  3. If I could have an extention in light of the fact that I could not get hold of a majority of the texts I needed to write the essay



He agreed at once to item 3 in light of the circumstances. In response to question 2 he said it was the History Librarian's fault and he had requested the book in 2003 and it still hadn't been purchased. This goes against everything I know of the History Librarian who when asked by my other history tutor always makes appropriate provision for the books of that module. To item 1 he said to me that I should have

  1. started work on my essay when I got the title and book list in the middle of last term

  2. appraised him on the situation of availability of books because he is "a very busy man who has to keep track of a great many things"

  3. put a reserve on the items I wanted



Number 3 I did, but when the items aren't due back until two days before the essay is due in there is not a lot putting a reserve on an item can do. Number 1 is a fair point and I know I should have started sooner. However, I didn't and given the number of people who needed the books and the amount of time the chances are that without them being put into short loans not everyone would have had access to them anyway.*1 I believe point number 2 is him trying to excuse himself. It is not the task of the student to make sure that the texts they need are properly available from the library. Before he issued the book list he should have made sure that all items on it were easily available for the number of students who would need access to them. He is the lecturer and he should liase with library staff to ensure each book on that list has the relevant amount of loan time attached.

When I told him that I had emailed him during the holidays about it and the email had bounced he said "sweetheart, you need to be realistic about these things. Firstly I was in Suffolk*2 and secondly it's unreasonable for you to expect me to check my email on boxing day. Noone checks their email then".*3

After this I was far too pissed to speak any more so I thanked him for the extention after telling him once more that it was unacceptable and walked out.

I'm still livid. I know I probably overreacted, but I'm still rather angry. Just

GRRRRR

.

On top of this he was being all flappy all lesson about how the ten week term this term (usually 12 weeks - two weeks are carried over to the next term this year owing to an early easter). He told us he had cut some material because the shorter term meant he couldn't fit everything in. This is not true. The general understanding is that in this event the first two weeks are to be treated as the last two of the previous term. He explained that nothing like this had happened before. Bollocks had it - I know that at the University of Kent we used to run by a three terms of 10 weeks instead of the 12 12 6 system that we have at present, and this was not so long ago (though before my time ;)). Certainly during his. He's been here for years.

I give up with History Professors. I really do >.<

*sigh*

*grrrr*

*1 ordinary loan is 4 weeks. There are options available to tutors for soon to become high demand books to have them put to 1 week loan, short loan collection (a loan of overnight [from whenever the books is withdrawn until 10am the next day]) or even short loan four hour collection where the book is restricted to the library and only allowed to be used for a stretch of four hours at a time.

*2 may not have been Suffolk. I was a rather pissed at the time from him calling me "sweetheart". Was also very pissed for being patronised. I'm 21. There is no need to treat me as if I'm 6.

*3 I checked mine every day of the holidays including christmas day :o I wasn't asking him to check it then, or on boxing day, but at some point during the holidays was not too much to ask I feel.
lizziec: (Default)

Pissed Off



"why?" I hear you ask.

I'll tell you.

I have a 5k word essay due in on Friday at 12pm. I looked for the books in the library (of which there is generally one copy of each text for a class of 15 all of whom will be writing the essay) at the end of last term and found they were all out on four week loan and not due back until this Wednesday. I found the books I could and put reservations on the others and sent an email to my tutor for this subject explaining the situation and asking if he had any of these texts that I could borrow for the holidays, mentioning that I could collect them from anywhere in the Canterbury area.

The email bounced because his email box was full.

Today I found him to ask

  1. Why the texts weren't in the short loans collection when there are so few of them and would clearly be in short supply

  2. Why a certain text wasn't in the library at all

  3. If I could have an extention in light of the fact that I could not get hold of a majority of the texts I needed to write the essay



He agreed at once to item 3 in light of the circumstances. In response to question 2 he said it was the History Librarian's fault and he had requested the book in 2003 and it still hadn't been purchased. This goes against everything I know of the History Librarian who when asked by my other history tutor always makes appropriate provision for the books of that module. To item 1 he said to me that I should have

  1. started work on my essay when I got the title and book list in the middle of last term

  2. appraised him on the situation of availability of books because he is "a very busy man who has to keep track of a great many things"

  3. put a reserve on the items I wanted



Number 3 I did, but when the items aren't due back until two days before the essay is due in there is not a lot putting a reserve on an item can do. Number 1 is a fair point and I know I should have started sooner. However, I didn't and given the number of people who needed the books and the amount of time the chances are that without them being put into short loans not everyone would have had access to them anyway.*1 I believe point number 2 is him trying to excuse himself. It is not the task of the student to make sure that the texts they need are properly available from the library. Before he issued the book list he should have made sure that all items on it were easily available for the number of students who would need access to them. He is the lecturer and he should liase with library staff to ensure each book on that list has the relevant amount of loan time attached.

When I told him that I had emailed him during the holidays about it and the email had bounced he said "sweetheart, you need to be realistic about these things. Firstly I was in Suffolk*2 and secondly it's unreasonable for you to expect me to check my email on boxing day. Noone checks their email then".*3

After this I was far too pissed to speak any more so I thanked him for the extention after telling him once more that it was unacceptable and walked out.

I'm still livid. I know I probably overreacted, but I'm still rather angry. Just

GRRRRR

.

On top of this he was being all flappy all lesson about how the ten week term this term (usually 12 weeks - two weeks are carried over to the next term this year owing to an early easter). He told us he had cut some material because the shorter term meant he couldn't fit everything in. This is not true. The general understanding is that in this event the first two weeks are to be treated as the last two of the previous term. He explained that nothing like this had happened before. Bollocks had it - I know that at the University of Kent we used to run by a three terms of 10 weeks instead of the 12 12 6 system that we have at present, and this was not so long ago (though before my time ;)). Certainly during his. He's been here for years.

I give up with History Professors. I really do >.<

*sigh*

*grrrr*

*1 ordinary loan is 4 weeks. There are options available to tutors for soon to become high demand books to have them put to 1 week loan, short loan collection (a loan of overnight [from whenever the books is withdrawn until 10am the next day]) or even short loan four hour collection where the book is restricted to the library and only allowed to be used for a stretch of four hours at a time.

*2 may not have been Suffolk. I was a rather pissed at the time from him calling me "sweetheart". Was also very pissed for being patronised. I'm 21. There is no need to treat me as if I'm 6.

*3 I checked mine every day of the holidays including christmas day :o I wasn't asking him to check it then, or on boxing day, but at some point during the holidays was not too much to ask I feel.
lizziec: (Default)

Pissed Off



"why?" I hear you ask.

I'll tell you.

I have a 5k word essay due in on Friday at 12pm. I looked for the books in the library (of which there is generally one copy of each text for a class of 15 all of whom will be writing the essay) at the end of last term and found they were all out on four week loan and not due back until this Wednesday. I found the books I could and put reservations on the others and sent an email to my tutor for this subject explaining the situation and asking if he had any of these texts that I could borrow for the holidays, mentioning that I could collect them from anywhere in the Canterbury area.

The email bounced because his email box was full.

Today I found him to ask

  1. Why the texts weren't in the short loans collection when there are so few of them and would clearly be in short supply

  2. Why a certain text wasn't in the library at all

  3. If I could have an extention in light of the fact that I could not get hold of a majority of the texts I needed to write the essay



He agreed at once to item 3 in light of the circumstances. In response to question 2 he said it was the History Librarian's fault and he had requested the book in 2003 and it still hadn't been purchased. This goes against everything I know of the History Librarian who when asked by my other history tutor always makes appropriate provision for the books of that module. To item 1 he said to me that I should have

  1. started work on my essay when I got the title and book list in the middle of last term

  2. appraised him on the situation of availability of books because he is "a very busy man who has to keep track of a great many things"

  3. put a reserve on the items I wanted



Number 3 I did, but when the items aren't due back until two days before the essay is due in there is not a lot putting a reserve on an item can do. Number 1 is a fair point and I know I should have started sooner. However, I didn't and given the number of people who needed the books and the amount of time the chances are that without them being put into short loans not everyone would have had access to them anyway.*1 I believe point number 2 is him trying to excuse himself. It is not the task of the student to make sure that the texts they need are properly available from the library. Before he issued the book list he should have made sure that all items on it were easily available for the number of students who would need access to them. He is the lecturer and he should liase with library staff to ensure each book on that list has the relevant amount of loan time attached.

When I told him that I had emailed him during the holidays about it and the email had bounced he said "sweetheart, you need to be realistic about these things. Firstly I was in Suffolk*2 and secondly it's unreasonable for you to expect me to check my email on boxing day. Noone checks their email then".*3

After this I was far too pissed to speak any more so I thanked him for the extention after telling him once more that it was unacceptable and walked out.

I'm still livid. I know I probably overreacted, but I'm still rather angry. Just

GRRRRR

.

On top of this he was being all flappy all lesson about how the ten week term this term (usually 12 weeks - two weeks are carried over to the next term this year owing to an early easter). He told us he had cut some material because the shorter term meant he couldn't fit everything in. This is not true. The general understanding is that in this event the first two weeks are to be treated as the last two of the previous term. He explained that nothing like this had happened before. Bollocks had it - I know that at the University of Kent we used to run by a three terms of 10 weeks instead of the 12 12 6 system that we have at present, and this was not so long ago (though before my time ;)). Certainly during his. He's been here for years.

I give up with History Professors. I really do >.<

*sigh*

*grrrr*

*1 ordinary loan is 4 weeks. There are options available to tutors for soon to become high demand books to have them put to 1 week loan, short loan collection (a loan of overnight [from whenever the books is withdrawn until 10am the next day]) or even short loan four hour collection where the book is restricted to the library and only allowed to be used for a stretch of four hours at a time.

*2 may not have been Suffolk. I was a rather pissed at the time from him calling me "sweetheart". Was also very pissed for being patronised. I'm 21. There is no need to treat me as if I'm 6.

*3 I checked mine every day of the holidays including christmas day :o I wasn't asking him to check it then, or on boxing day, but at some point during the holidays was not too much to ask I feel.
lizziec: (Default)
..but today I was absolutely fuming. Livid or Furious are good words to describe the state I was in, and thinking about it logically I can't even work out why I was so very very angry over this incident.

Today I had my Museum and Heratage seminar thingy and there's a clique of three people who always sit together in the seminar and talk half way through. I don't like them and they strike me as unpleasent in not what they say, but how they say it. At the end of the seminar (which was quite dull in itself) Dr Ormrod was trying to work out who would do a group presentation on which subject. I volunteered right at the beginning to do the one for next week but noone volunteered to help and so I assumed one of the duds who never turns up would be assigned to me, which was bad enough. Anyway, the clique who had been talking very loudly in their corner lost the tussel for the presentation they wanted and immediately expressed interest in mine. Dr Ormrod said only two of the three could do it with me because of the number in the group as a whole. To be honest I was a bit angry already because they didn't want the presentation until most other options had been removed from them. Then I went to exchange email addys to find the other person telling me that *She* had to be in our group becasue the only things left were in the last two weeks and she couldn't do those cos she wouldn't be here. So for this presentation which counts for 20% of my final marks I will be dictated to by a clique of people I don't like and who clearly don't like me and it will all get screwed up. There are four doing a three people (max) presentation and Dr Ormrod doesn't even know. I know my personality isn't strong enough to assert my views and *win* any struggle ahead.

I'm angry. Less angry than I was, but that only means I don't want to really properly hurt people any more. I'm slowly calming down. I scared myself with how angry I was. *growl*

I just don't know what to do :(
lizziec: (Default)
..but today I was absolutely fuming. Livid or Furious are good words to describe the state I was in, and thinking about it logically I can't even work out why I was so very very angry over this incident.

Today I had my Museum and Heratage seminar thingy and there's a clique of three people who always sit together in the seminar and talk half way through. I don't like them and they strike me as unpleasent in not what they say, but how they say it. At the end of the seminar (which was quite dull in itself) Dr Ormrod was trying to work out who would do a group presentation on which subject. I volunteered right at the beginning to do the one for next week but noone volunteered to help and so I assumed one of the duds who never turns up would be assigned to me, which was bad enough. Anyway, the clique who had been talking very loudly in their corner lost the tussel for the presentation they wanted and immediately expressed interest in mine. Dr Ormrod said only two of the three could do it with me because of the number in the group as a whole. To be honest I was a bit angry already because they didn't want the presentation until most other options had been removed from them. Then I went to exchange email addys to find the other person telling me that *She* had to be in our group becasue the only things left were in the last two weeks and she couldn't do those cos she wouldn't be here. So for this presentation which counts for 20% of my final marks I will be dictated to by a clique of people I don't like and who clearly don't like me and it will all get screwed up. There are four doing a three people (max) presentation and Dr Ormrod doesn't even know. I know my personality isn't strong enough to assert my views and *win* any struggle ahead.

I'm angry. Less angry than I was, but that only means I don't want to really properly hurt people any more. I'm slowly calming down. I scared myself with how angry I was. *growl*

I just don't know what to do :(
lizziec: (Default)
..but today I was absolutely fuming. Livid or Furious are good words to describe the state I was in, and thinking about it logically I can't even work out why I was so very very angry over this incident.

Today I had my Museum and Heratage seminar thingy and there's a clique of three people who always sit together in the seminar and talk half way through. I don't like them and they strike me as unpleasent in not what they say, but how they say it. At the end of the seminar (which was quite dull in itself) Dr Ormrod was trying to work out who would do a group presentation on which subject. I volunteered right at the beginning to do the one for next week but noone volunteered to help and so I assumed one of the duds who never turns up would be assigned to me, which was bad enough. Anyway, the clique who had been talking very loudly in their corner lost the tussel for the presentation they wanted and immediately expressed interest in mine. Dr Ormrod said only two of the three could do it with me because of the number in the group as a whole. To be honest I was a bit angry already because they didn't want the presentation until most other options had been removed from them. Then I went to exchange email addys to find the other person telling me that *She* had to be in our group becasue the only things left were in the last two weeks and she couldn't do those cos she wouldn't be here. So for this presentation which counts for 20% of my final marks I will be dictated to by a clique of people I don't like and who clearly don't like me and it will all get screwed up. There are four doing a three people (max) presentation and Dr Ormrod doesn't even know. I know my personality isn't strong enough to assert my views and *win* any struggle ahead.

I'm angry. Less angry than I was, but that only means I don't want to really properly hurt people any more. I'm slowly calming down. I scared myself with how angry I was. *growl*

I just don't know what to do :(
lizziec: (Default)
Well I'm in the Library starting off a new Uni year (for me) in traditional style with procrastination from my reccommended reading.

So..um..what is going on with me I hear you ask.

Not a lot is the answer (now you see why I've not updated for a while ;))

I finished work at Andrew Reeves (the posh Belgravia estate agents) tho my last day was slightly marred by the people at Victoria trying to give me a penalty fare. I got on the train without a valid ticket cos otherwise I would have missed my train, fully intending to pay when I got to Victoria. When I got there and went to pay for my return ticket I got pulled to one side and treated like a criminal cos it's (apparently, tho I didn't know this) an offense to get on a train without a ticket if the ticket office is open. SO they said I needed to pay a penalty fare even though I tried to explain I would have missed my train and been late for work. They just carried on saying I'd need to pay the penalty fare and it got too much and I started to cry. The guy looked at me like I was putting it on...and then to cap the indignity I started to hyperventalate big time. My head started to tingle and I couldn't stand up so I sat down and all teh time he's watching me like I'm faking it. Eventually the two ticket barrier guys come over and ask me what's up and I try to tell them while not being able to breathe and one of them brings me some water (which I nearly choked on cos my breathing was so irregular by this point) and they argued with the Penalty Fare guy about it and eventually let me ppay just for my return ticket. Evetually, when I was sufficiently calm to stand again I started to go and the Penalty Fare guy looks at me, glares and says "that won't work again you know". Like I was doing it on purpose >.< I can think of better places to make myself look undignified, stupid and immature...

Beffan met me from work that day tho, so things started to improve :) We scandalised the carrage of our train with our talk ;)

Anyway, I saw Phantom of the Opera on Monday evening and it was absolutely magnificent. At the end I felt so sorry for the Phantom. I didn't have a great view from the balcony so I want to go again and sit in the stalls. Still, it took my breath away. It was brilliant.

Les Miserables was Tuesday's show and that was even better than Phantom, and very different. I saw this one from the stalls and had a wonderful view, and at the end the show had a standing Ovation. I didn't like the Older Cosette, but JVJ and Javert were great and Marius...*happy sigh* It made me cry more than once. It was overwhelming.

Came back to canterbury on Saturday and left behind a whole shedload of stuff :o(

Beffan is staying ATM and that is great :D

Rah cooked a lovely roast beef dinner yesterday which was *YUMYUM* :D and today is her 1st wedding anniversary - the weather a year ago today was much much nicer ;)

Speaking of weddings, ben and I have talked to the Vicar who will marry us on Friday and booked the wedding for the 3rd September 2005 at 3pm. The most complicated question of the whole thing for me was "Are you baptised" which ellicited the response "yes, no, possibly, not sure, maybe?" (see my history as a mormon for further explanation ;))

Mum found something to stop herself getting bored over the weekend - taking piccies of piccies and putting them up on her site. These include baby pics of me and pill, which is the reason the link will *NOT* be included here ;)

Ben and I watched Battle of Britain yesterday - top film :D

Umm...I'm sure there's other stuff I ment to include and forgot, in which case I may add it later :)

obligatory LJ quiz )

September 2013

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15 161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 20 October 2017 07:47 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios