All EOS blogs All Spain blogs  Start your own blog Start your own blog 

The Thoughts Of Vicious Sid

In their day, Nostradamus was ridiculed, Darwin was poo-pooed and even Brian Clough had his critics but in these enlightened times, their thoughts are now seen in a different light and they are more and more respected. Well, Never Mind The Bollocks Here's The Thoughts Of Vicious Sid. He's a lover, not a fighter, unless it's about fighting for the bullied and oppressed and, in this day and age, that's the ordinary man and woman in the street. He will fight their corner until the end. He is the voice of reason, fair and just but will pull no punches when it comes to the dark underbelly of this evil world: things like lawyers, judges, politicians, perverts and Manchester United Football Club. Make yourself a cup of tea and pull up a chair, dear reader, and delve into the world of The Thoughts Of Vicious Sid. You never know, it may change your life forever. Together, we'll put this world to rights. All comments below are from the deep and meaningful mind of Vicious Sid himself and published and 'Liked' in major newspapers. If writing be the food of love, then read on . . .

The Thoughts Of Vicious Sid 02.11.12
03 November 2012 @ 11:20

My blog will be updated daily, so make sure you come back! If you would like to add or reply to a comment on one of the articles below just send me your comment and, if it's reasonably decent and not libellous or anything like that, I'll add it to the article (don't forget to include the date and title of the article).

 

02.11.12
Benefit cheat claiming he could not walk faces jail after being caught doing triathlon
A WELFARE scrounger who pocketed more than £17,000 by claiming he could barely walk has been caught competing in a 15-mile triathlon. Keep-fit fanatic Anthony Connor, 39, said a stroke left him with such a severe limp it would take him five minutes to walk 75 metres.
He also said he needed help getting in and out of the bath and climbing stairs.
But investigators secretly filmed him swimming, cycling and running at the Tatton Park triathlon in Knutsford, Cheshire.
Footage showed him tearing past spectators on his bicycle and later raising his arms in triumph as he completed the run.
He did the entire course in 2hr 30min.
Manchester magistrates were told he had initially claimed disability benefit legitimately in 2006 after suffering a stroke that year. He also claimed income support, housing benefits and council tax benefit.
But after a tip-off, officials began filming Connor and caught up with him as he took part in the triathlon on September 9, 2010.

vicious.sid: Told the benefits people that he couldn't walk further than 75 metres then did a triathlon, but he only did it to finish the course, not to win. Oh, well that's alright then!!! I wonder who thought of that excuse first, him or his lawyer?
Sigh . . .

ElviriaDreamer: You see that's the thing with lawers, they don't mind defending stroke affected criminals BUT when a law abiding woman is left disabled with a death sentence from multiple brain haemorrhages caused by gross medical misconduct and medical negligence in the NHS and by a very famous medical insurance company ...they don't want to defend her to get her the care/medication/treatment she needs. SAYS IT ALL!

 

02.11.12
Is it in the genes or the injections? Stars just aren't who they used to be
Simon Cowell has caused a stir with hit ballooning bonce – but he’s just the latest in a long line of celebrities hell-bent on defying the ageing process. The X Factor mogul – who’s confessed to having Botox twice a year – sported a puffy face when he appeared on Jay Leno’s US chat show earlier this week.
Whether his swollen chops improve the 53-year-old’s appearance is open to debate, but many have tried and failed – and then tried again and failed some more.
However, stars wouldn’t seek cosmetic assistance in the first place if there weren’t enough proven successes to instil them with the confidence to hand over their credit cards.
While Jocelyn Wildenstein – aka the Bride of Wildenstein or Catwoman – has become the poster girl for anti-surgery campaigns, the likes of Kylie Minogue, Katie Price and Nicole Kidman have all wisely adopted a moderate approach after reportedly embracing Botox.

vicious.sid: Jackie Stallone must look in the mirror and think that she looks good . . . huh? Barry Manilow should just change the name of his song to "I Can't Smile . . .". Mickey Rourke has just destroyed his looks - he would be well good-looking now, most girls like rugged, but he prefers to look like a badly-made puppet. It's all very sad.

 

02.11.12
RDM blasts refs.. after Blues get 2 pens - and win! Chelsea 5 Man Utd 4
DANIEL STURRIDGE helped Chelsea into the last eight as the Capital One Cup served up another thriller. But Blues boss Roberto Di Matteo continued to moan about refs despite being given TWO penalties by Lee Mason.
RDM moaned: “Nobody is talking about the handball in the second half when we should have had another penalty.
“We’ve had two situations in the last 12 months — at QPR last season and against United on Sunday — when we were not treated fairly.
“Fernando Torres should never have been sent off on Sunday and last year at QPR Jose Bosingwa’s sending off was harsh.
“We’d just like to be treated fairly.”
Chelsea, who needed a last-ditch penalty from Eden Hazard to take the tie to extra time, now travel to Leeds for their quarter-final next month
Di Matteo refused to respond to their manager Neil Warnock’s comments that Chelsea are a disgrace for accusing ref Clattenburg.
The Italian would only say: “With Chelsea and Leeds there is a bit of history. It should be a very interesting game.”
United boss Alex Ferguson blamed Nani after his side led 3-2 with seconds of normal time remaining.
Fergie said: “Nani decided to try to beat a player and it ended up being a penalty to them.
“You expect to see a game out.”

vicious.sid: Don't worry all you Plastics, Old Red Nose will point out to Mason where he went wrong. It won't happen again!

 

02.11.12
Mum in ‘horrifying’ racist attack dodges jail
A WOMAN who was pictured launching a “horrifying” racist attack on a stranger in front of her two kids has walked free from court. Amanda Lowe, 26, was freed by a judge - despite having previous convictions for violence - after he said it would not be fair on her children to jail her.
The mum of two - who is now pregnant with her third child - can be seen leaving her baby in a pram to join in an attack on victim Khuram Nisar earlier this summer.
Lowe had previously started the trouble by calling the victim a “f****** P***” and a “terrorist” and when he responded Lowe’s boyfriend Wesley Earls punched him to the ground.
CCTV footage released today shows Lowe wading in and repeatedly kicking and stamping on Khuram’s face and head as he lies on the ground.
She then returns to her four-month-old baby and eight-year-old daughter before walking away.
The “disgraceful” attack took place in broad daylight in front of families and workers enjoying the summer weather in May.
Twenty minutes after the attack Lowe, Earls and pal Daniel Wray — who punched Khuram in the head — were arrested by cops.
At a court hearing on Friday, Judge Lindsey Kushner QC hit out at Lowe’s behaviour warning: “I can’t emphasise strongly enough: kids who have mothers who behave like you end up behaving like you.
“That damage starts from when they are tiny.”
Sitting at Manchester Crown Court Judge Kushner spared the three thugs jail - despite having 21 previous convictions between them.
He said Lowe, who had been drinking with friends, was “lucky” not to have been looking at a “care case”.

vicious.sid: A message to all the tourists in the world: Come and visit Britain, especially our Jewel In The Crown - Manchester. You may even make it back home again!!! Sigh . . .

ElviriaDreamer: As she's a repeat offender let's hope next time she's in front of the judge, it isn't for punching and kicking her kids like that.

 

02.11.12
The £1.6 billion bill to rescue crumbling Parliament: Victorian structure is stuffed with asbestos and leaky roofs
Parliament is so dilapidated that it would be condemned and demolished were it not one of the most famous buildings in the world
Parliament is so dilapidated that it would be condemned and demolished were it not one of the most famous buildings in the world, experts said yesterday.
The Victorian structure is so stuffed with asbestos and leaky roofs that it will require billions of pounds of renovation just to keep it standing.
In a report commissioned by Parliament, it is warned that MPs and Lords will have to move out of the building within the next decade to enable a massive programme of works to electrics, heating, ventilation systems, drainage and stone work.
They concluded that the World Heritage Site - which contains the Commons and Lords chambers as well as suites of committee rooms, offices and dining rooms - was so poorly-maintained that it is ‘remarkable that it continues to function’.
And they warned that if nothing is done to make it safe, the Palace of Westminster could fall victim to a catastrophic fire the like of which famously destroyed its predecessor in 1834.
The report into the ‘looming crisis’ put forward four options for dealing with the mess - although MPs have already rejected the nuclear option of moving out of the Palace altogether, turning it into a museum and building an entirely new parliament building somewhere else in London.
Other ideas include continuing with piecemeal repairs costing £26million a year, and spending 10 years on a boosted programme of repairs during weekends and recesses.
The most likely option is to move MPs and peers out of the neo-Gothic edifice altogether, housing them in new temporary buildings on the Parliamentary estate or in facilities such as the nearby Queen Elizabeth Conference Centre or Church House.
Although they do not put a final cost on the work, they say it will be at least £1.6billion.
The damning report on the state of the home of British democracy was ordered by the House of Commons Commission.

vicious.sid: Ha ha ha ha!!! £1.6 billion? What are the odds that the final bill will be at least £9.2 billion and, thankfully, that will work out as a saving of £673 million? (Politicians' sums, not mine!!) And a few politicians will have big, big smiles on their faces . . . If only Guy Fawkes were still here, he'd do it for nothing (in his own way, of course) and, as long as the lovely politicians are still in there, I don't think a single British pleb would stop him!!!!

 

02.11.12
In a furious attack on the Government's child benefit cuts, Angela Epstein writes: 'It’s outrageous. My family is losing child benefit just for earning £100k'
For nearly 20 years I’ve been on benefits. Despite earning a good salary as a journalist and broadcaster and being married to a chartered accountant, the Government money lands in my account each month. I accept it happily, without so much as a twitch of embarrassment.
I’m not alone. I have friends who are lawyers, doctors, pharmacists — all highly paid professionals — who are also unapologetic in their receipt of these state handouts.
I’m not talking about a tax loophole or state backhander that allows the streetwise to filch from an already over-committed welfare state. I am, of course, referring to child benefit.
This has always been a one-size-fits-all payment, which is not affected by the level of income coming into a household.
This counts as recognition by the tax system that, as parents, we deserve a little help in supporting our families, regardless of our gross income.
For people like me and my husband, it also means that those who plough a lot into the system are guaranteed to get at least a little out.
But now, just because my children are growing up in a household where both their mother and father earn a decent living, the State wants to renege on its part of the deal.
As part of the Coalition’s austerity programme of spending cuts, a million households in the UK — the wealthiest 15 per cent — will soon wave goodbye to this helping hand. 
In a disgraceful act of financial myopia, the Government is axing or partially axing the broad entitlement of family allowance.
Any household where one parent earns more than £50,000 a year will lose a proportion of the benefit on a sliding scale — 1 per cent for every £100 earned over this threshold. Those earning more than £60,000 lose all of their benefit. 
In our house, that means our benefit payments will soon be no more than a childhood memory since my salary hovers around £50,000 and my husband’s is significantly more.
No longer eligible for the monthly payments, we will be left with the invidious choice of either giving it up completely or continuing to take the benefit and then having it clawed back from us when we fill in our tax forms for the financial year. 
I understand that we are going through a time of great financial difficulty in this country and that sacrifices must be made to get us back on track.
But why should my children lose out, simply because their parents have had the temerity to work hard and earn a good living?

vicious.sid: I think this is just an article to provoke an emotional response. If she really thinks like that then she's just like all the other millionaires who live in that Cloud Cuckoo Land somewhere with the fairies. Does the name 'Child Benefit' not give you some idea? A 'Benefit' is specially designed for people who cannot afford to bring up their children properly because of a lack of money - it's not for the parents, it's for the children so they can at least eat properly. With that amount of money coming into the household she shouldn't need any benefits - if she does, then there's something seriously wrong. I think she secretly knows that it's a case of rich people grabbing as much as they can as usual, she's never had any hardships. If I earned that kind of money I would gladly give up my 'Benefits'. This is a truly sad world that we live in.

 

02.11.12
What the President saw: Shocked Obama flies over Atlantic City disaster zone to witness massive trail of devastation left by Sandy
President Obama took time out from the campaign trail to visit a stretch of the devastated New Jersey coast and take on a role of comforter-in-chief that could be a major boost to his hopes of re-election next week.
Obama was accompanied by Governor Chris Christie, a Republican bruiser and Mitt Romney backer who showered him with effusive praise for his handling of Superstorm Sandy, giving the President a bipartisan sheen that his aides believe could help him secure victory on Tuesday. 
Leaving Romney on the sidelines holding campaign events in Florida in which he had to pull his punches and barely featured on television anyway, Obama travelled to Atlantic City to get an aerial view of the widespread damage caused by the storm.
The images of Obama offering solace to New Jersey residents who had lost their home could be of incalculable political value in the final few days of the 2012 presidential campaign.
He was joined on the presidential helicopter, Marine One, for the one-hour tour by Christie, who faces his own re-election bid next year and is widely believed to be laying the foundations for a presidential bid in 2016 should Romney lose this time around.
'I want to let you know that your governor is working overtime,' Obama told victims at an emergency shelter after the tour.
'The entire country has been watching what's been happening. Everybody knows how hard Jersey has been hit.'
Christie said:  'It's really important to have the president of the United States here.'
Obama returned the compliment.
The politicians' meeting came as people in the heavily populated US East Coast corridor battered by Sandy took the first cautious steps to reclaim their upended daily routines, even as rescuers combed neighbourhoods strewn with debris and scarred by floods and fire.

vicious.sid: Terrible, absolutely heartbreaking. It makes you feel so helpless. My heart goes out to each and every one of those poor people who have suffered. I know what Obama is doing is for the cameras, I'm not that naive, but can you imagine Cameron doing the same? Going around the devastated towns in his coat and jeans, hugging and offering comfort to the poor victims? I just couldn't imagine anything other than Cameron in his two thousand pound suit keeping the plebs at arms length so he didn't get it dirty and looking sad spouting some lie or other. I'm beginning to think that I don't regard British politicians very highly. Wonder why?

 

02.11.12
Widow killed by dog pack: Daughter's five pets pounce on 71-year-old as she calls in to feed them
A great-grandmother was mauled to death by a pack of dogs she was feeding as a favour for her daughter.
The five animals pounced on Gloria Knowles, 71, after she went into the garden to give them their evening meal.
The widow was badly injured when the dogs – two 'giant' Bordeaux French mastiffs, two American bulldogs and a small mongrel – suddenly turned on her. Neighbours described hearing 'hysterical screaming and barking' from the garden.
Mrs Knowles lived next door to her daughter, Beverley Mason, with her granddaughter, who has a baby of  her own.
Mrs Mason lives with her husband, Dylan, and her other three children. The couple own the dogs together.
The family has run Harrington's pie and mash shop in Tooting, South London, for several generations.
Police and ambulance services were called to the house in Morden, also in South London, on Tuesday night.
Five dogs were later seized from the semi-detached property, and it was revealed that Mrs Knowles had had a heart attack as the animals set on her. Nazir Hussein, a friend and neighbour of Mrs Knowles, was alerted to the attack when he heard Mrs Mason screaming 'Mum, Mum, Mum' outside the house.
Mr Hussein, 65, said he had long been afraid of the family's dogs,  describing them as 'vicious'.
'I would see the dogs being walked in the park but I didn't want to walk near them,' he said.
'They were vicious dogs – you knew by how they pulled on the lead and you could hear them barking from my house.
'There were so many dogs something like this was bound to happen.'

vicious.sid: I've been trying to work this out for many years. Can someone please explain to me why people would want more than one dog? Why would they want just ONE dog that was originally bred for being ferocious and for hunting? But to want a PACK of hunting dogs living in a house, why? All dogs have the pack mentality, if you have just one bad one, they will all eventually join in an attack. It can't be for companionship because you only need one dog for that. It can't be for security, to have that many they would have to be protecting a few acres. Image? You'd have to be quite a sad person to think that anyone would look up to someone like that. Breeding? In a house? You'd need a farm for that. Come on, someone, please tell me why, I would so love to know. I really don't get it.

 

02.11.12
'He doesn’t need to be handsome': Bond girl Bérénice Marlohe talks about her ideal man as she strips down for FHM shoot
She's the Bond girl that everyone's talking about and Skyfall star Bérénice Marlohe has proved just what the producers saw in her.
Posing for a series of sultry photos for the new FHM magazine, the French actress looked the epitome of a Bond girl as she slipped into some lacy underwear.
She might be one of the most beautiful women on the planet, but Bérénice told the magazine that her ideal man didn't have to be handsome to catch her eye:
He doesn’t need to be handsome. If he has nothing to say or he is not funny or doesn’t have something happening in his eye, then he is not attractive. Charisma and sense of humour is what gives him that ‘wow’, you know?,' she said.
She might be remaining tight-lipped about her personal life but it seems as if you don't have to be drop dead gorgeous to be in with a chance.

vicious.sid: THERE IS A GOD! Call me, Berenice! Though my daughters keep telling me I would be the exception to the rule - there's 'not being handsome' and there's 'being downright repulsive'!

 

02.11.12
Australia's richest woman to appear in court over control of £2.6bn family trust in legal battle with three of her children
Australia's richest woman, Gina Rinehart, lost a court bid on Wednesday to throw out a lawsuit brought by three of her children over control of a £2.6billion family trust.
Justice Paul Brereton of the New South Wales Supreme Court ruled that the case should go to a full trial at a date yet to be determined.
Rinehart's three eldest children are seeking to remove her as the sole trustee of the pool that holds an almost one-quarter share in Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd, one of the world's largest privately-owned mining companies.
The case has captured public attention in Australia as it reveals details of the private life of Rinehart, the only child of Lang Hancock - a household name in the country - after being credited with discovering the world's largest deposit of iron ore in Pilbara, Western Australia.
Rinehart had tried unsuccessfully to have the hearings held behind closed doors after her three elder children - Hope Rinehart Welker, Bianca Rinehart and John Hancock - accused her of serious misconduct in her role as trustee.

vicious.sid: Money destroys everything. But that's what you get when you give your kids everything on a plate. That's why I have the loveliest, kindest kids in the world because they appreciate everything they have. It saddens me to say that I even know of people who are just sitting waiting for their rich parents to die. Like I said, money destroys everything.

 

02.11.12
Fergie points the finger at Nani
ALEX FERGUSON has told Nani: You’re to blame for Manchester United’s Capital One Cup exit. United appeared to be heading into the quarter-finals of the competition after taking a 3-2 lead against Chelsea.
But with just seconds left on the clock, Nani lost possession before the Blues were awarded a last-gasp spot-kick at Stamford Bridge.
Eden Hazard converted the penalty and Roberto Di Matteo’s men went on to win 5-4 after extra-time — much to Fergie’s annoyance.
The United boss said: “All we needed to do was see the game out by keeping possession.
“But Nani decided to try and beat a player, lost the ball and they got a penalty kick.
“We gave the ball away for a third goal and we were in complete control of the game at that point.
“I don’t know whether it was a penalty or not but nevertheless I think the young players started to feel it and it was very difficult for us in extra time.”
Ferguson refused to condemn Nani, but the Portuguese winger will be well aware he missed a glorious chance to impress his manager.
The Scot added: “He’s an individual and he’s a player that wants to beat men so we’re not going to discourage him from that.
“But in that situation if he’d have kept the ball in the corner flag the game is over.”

vicious.sid: Well, it's safe to say that God is not happy, Nani!



Like 0




0 Comments


Only registered users can comment on this blog post. Please Sign In or Register now.




 

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x