rick.beckley@hotmail.co.uk

I was on Fraisthorpe beach at Bridlington today and was spoken to by a
policeman. He asked me why I believed that it was a nudist beach to
which I replied that there were other naked people there. He informed
me in no uncertain terms that nudity was not allowed on the beach and
took my name and address. He told me that I would be prosecuted for
indecent exposure if I was naked on the beach again.

I do not believe that I was doing anything wrong. I was naked on the
beach reading a book. How can the police get away with intimidation
like this?

Any ideas on how I can complain?

AndyC

<rick.beckley@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1186370026.195782.185070@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>I was on Fraisthorpe beach at Bridlington today and was spoken to by a
> policeman. He asked me why I believed that it was a nudist beach to
> which I replied that there were other naked people there. He informed
> me in no uncertain terms that nudity was not allowed on the beach and
> took my name and address. He told me that I would be prosecuted for
> indecent exposure if I was naked on the beach again.
>
> I do not believe that I was doing anything wrong. I was naked on the
> beach reading a book. How can the police get away with intimidation
> like this?
>
> Any ideas on how I can complain?

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/

Chris Lamb

On 6 Aug, 04:13, rick.beck...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> I was on Fraisthorpe beach at Bridlington today and was spoken to by a
> policeman. He asked me why I believed that it was a nudist beach to
> which I replied that there were other naked people there. He informed
> me in no uncertain terms that nudity was not allowed on the beach and
> took my name and address. He told me that I would be prosecuted for
> indecent exposure if I was naked on the beach again.
>
> I do not believe that I was doing anything wrong. I was naked on the
> beach reading a book. How can the police get away with intimidation
> like this?
>
> Any ideas on how I can complain?

Start by lodging a complaint with the North Yorkshire Police
Complaints and Professional Standards Department. See contact details
at: http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/contactus.asp.

If you're not satisfied with the way your complaint is dealt with, you
can then contact the Independent Police Complaints Commision:
http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/ . You could initiate the complaint with the
IPCC, but they will simply refer it to North Yorkshire Police for
investigation before taking any action themselves.

In order to stop police harrassment of the type you describe, it is
vital that as many victims as possible make a complaint about the
actions of the police. So do encourage other beach users to make their
own complaints. It would be useful to have a handout that can be given
to other beach users, outlining the legal position (simple nudity on
the beach is not illegal) and giving contact details for making a
complaint about the police. Perhaps FUN might consider producing such
a handout?

Chris

peterchecksfield@googlemail.com

On 6 Aug, 10:23, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:

> Who in their right mind would want to take their wife & kids to a
> beach used by deviants? In the words of those well known
> Daleks, "Exterminate exterminate" Hamish- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Which is why they should crack down on the deviants, not the people
who are just soaking up the sun or swimming.

But if 'normal' naturists are being made to think they're doing
something illegal then they're not going to report perverts to the
police. This is why official (or at least 'tolerated') beaches are a
good thing.

Hamish

On 6 Aug, 10:39, peterchecksfi...@googlemail.com wrote:
> On 6 Aug, 10:23, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>
> > Who in their right mind would want to take their wife & kids to a
> > beach used by deviants? In the words of those well known
> > Daleks, "Exterminate exterminate" Hamish- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Which is why they should crack down on the deviants, not the people
> who are just soaking up the sun or swimming.
>
> But if 'normal' naturists are being made to think they're doing
> something illegal then they're not going to report perverts to the
> police. This is why official (or at least 'tolerated') beaches are a
> good thing.

It`s time to stop pussyfooting around on our beaches. Send in John
Wayne & his deputies & extermininate exterminate ( not the goodies,
just the baddies ) ) I`m soon to be off to France & Spain for
some civilised naturism.

heavyhorses

>
> How many times have you reported this to the police?

To be honest it was our first visit to the beach and the guy made a sharp
exit as soon as he was spotted. Next time we will be more prepared, I think
if the genuine naturists weren't such a easy going bunch and started taking
pictures of the idiots they would soon find some where else to go and perv.
(or even just get a bleeding life).

marc

heavyhorses wrote:
>
>>
>> How many times have you reported this to the police?
>
> To be honest it was our first visit to the beach and the guy made a
> sharp exit as soon as he was spotted.

So did you report it?



Next time we will be more
> prepared, I think if the genuine naturists weren't such a easy going
> bunch and started taking pictures of the idiots they would soon find
> some where else to go and perv. (or even just get a bleeding life).

Why do you need to take pictures? Why not just call the police and say "
there is a man here taking pictures of children"?

rick.beckley@hotmail.co.uk

On 6 Aug, 10:10, Chris Lamb <chris7l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 6 Aug, 04:13, rick.beck...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>
> > I was on Fraisthorpe beach at Bridlington today and was spoken to by a
> > policeman. He asked me why I believed that it was a nudist beach to
> > which I replied that there were other naked people there. He informed
> > me in no uncertain terms that nudity was not allowed on the beach and
> > took my name and address. He told me that I would be prosecuted for
> > indecent exposure if I was naked on the beach again.
>
> > I do not believe that I was doing anything wrong. I was naked on the
> > beach reading a book. How can the police get away with intimidation
> > like this?
>
> > Any ideas on how I can complain?
>
> Start by lodging a complaint with the North Yorkshire Police
> Complaints and Professional Standards Department. See contact details
> at:http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/contactus.asp.
>
> If you're not satisfied with the way your complaint is dealt with, you
> can then contact the Independent Police Complaints Commision:http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/. You could initiate the complaint with the
> IPCC, but they will simply refer it to North Yorkshire Police for
> investigation before taking any action themselves.
>
> In order to stop police harrassment of the type you describe, it is
> vital that as many victims as possible make a complaint about the
> actions of the police. So do encourage other beach users to make their
> own complaints. It would be useful to have a handout that can be given
> to other beach users, outlining the legal position (simple nudity on
> the beach is not illegal) and giving contact details for making a
> complaint about the police. Perhaps FUN might consider producing such
> a handout?
>
> Chris

If anyone else wants to complain, I was told by the North Yorkshire
police that Fraisthorpe is in the Humberside police area. E-mail
Professional.Standards@humberside.pnn.police.uk.

alanbastardmp@yahoo.co.uk

Well there you go...what you were doing wrong my fine friend was you,
in your own words, was `reading a book`.

Thats what got up the nose of the local plod. You were reading a book
which means you are educated. The Plod dont like middle class folk
that can read books. It frightens them. Reading books gives middle
class folk fancy ideas about rights etc. It makes them able to
complain by writing letters.

Given that can you blame them for not wanting to tackle some deviant
or pervert who will fight back when there are plenty of educated folk
like you minding their own business, doing nothing but reading a book.
You bastards.

heavyhorses

>
> Who gives way to who is covered in the Highway Code , what is the point in
> thanking someone for doing what they should have been doing, or thanking
> someone for doing something that you should have been doing?


Haven't got a clue what the Highway code says about single track roads (and
life's not long enough to look) but what's wrong with showing a bit of
consideration a courtesy to others ?

marc

heavyhorses wrote:
>
>>
>> Who gives way to who is covered in the Highway Code , what is the
>> point in thanking someone for doing what they should have been doing,
>> or thanking someone for doing something that you should have been doing?
>
>
> Haven't got a clue what the Highway code says about single track roads (and
> life's not long enough to look) but what's wrong with showing a bit of
> consideration a courtesy to others ?


Spoken like a true muppet! You have a licence but can't be bothered to
check how you should be operating the machinery you have a licence for,
but in the interim you make up your own rules about what you consider to
be "courtesy".

heavyhorses

"133: Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle.
They may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming
towards you, or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing
place on your left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give
way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse
until you reach a passing place to let the other vehicle pass."

Thank you for enlightening us but like sevral other parts of the high way
code writen by someone living in an ideal world it as very little relivance
to what the actual road conditions or vechiels are.

I cant be doing two bad with only one minor bump and 0 pints in 20+ years of
driving.

David Looser

"marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:UpednX2YQND1wSrbRVnyvQA@bt.com...
>
> 133: Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle. They
> may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming towards you,
> or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your
> left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give way to vehicles
> coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse until you reach a
> passing place to let the other vehicle pass.

Which doesn't say anything useful at all, in fact is not even worth the
paper it's written on. You are going one way, the other driver is going the
other way. So who pulls into "a passing place on your left" when neither
driver has a "passing place on their left"?. Somebody has to back up (and
there is nothing in the HC to say which it should be), it's only polite for
the other driver to acknowledge that. Even if the other driver is
sufficiently on the ball to realise you are coming and wait by a passing
place for you to pass it's *still* polite to acknowledge that.

Where I live most roads are single track. Believe me I am well aware of the
etiquette of driving on them, unlike the authors of the highway code.

David.

marc

David Looser wrote:
> "marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:UpednX2YQND1wSrbRVnyvQA@bt.com...
>> 133: Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle. They
>> may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming towards you,
>> or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your
>> left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give way to vehicles
>> coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse until you reach a
>> passing place to let the other vehicle pass.
>
> Which doesn't say anything useful at all, in fact is not even worth the
> paper it's written on. You are going one way, the other driver is going the
> other way. So who pulls into "a passing place on your left" when neither
> driver has a "passing place on their left"?.
The one nearest to a passing place.

Somebody has to back up (and
> there is nothing in the HC to say which it should be),
"Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can."


it's only polite for
> the other driver to acknowledge that. Even if the other driver is
> sufficiently on the ball to realise you are coming and wait by a passing
> place for you to pass it's *still* polite to acknowledge that.


Polite? to acknowledge somthing so slight? It must be fun watching you
walk down the high street thanking all those people for not bumping into
you or for them moving out of your way.
>
> Where I live most roads are single track. Believe me I am well aware of the
> etiquette of driving on them, unlike the authors of the highway code.

And this "etiquette" can be found where? Or is it possible that it only
exists amogst those that decide that the HC doesn't apply to them?

David Looser

"marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:H_-dnSwMJOZJ-yrbnZ2dnUVZ8smonZ2d@bt.com...

> The one nearest to a passing place.

I didn't see that written in the highway code, and it's not always at all
clear who is the nearest, do you get out and measure the distance?

is nothing in the HC to say which it should be),
> "Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can."
>

Not a lot of use when there are no hills.

Some drivers can't, or won't, reverse. It's generally a lot easier (and
quicker) simply to be the one who does the reversing than to argue the
point.

>
> Polite? to acknowledge somthing so slight? It must be fun watching you
> walk down the high street thanking all those people for not bumping into
> you or for them moving out of your way.
>>

You may think it "slight", fortunately the great majority of drivers *do*
acknowledge this "slight thing" with a wave or a smile. The minority who
don't just make themselves look like grumpy old gits.

>> Where I live most roads are single track. Believe me I am well aware of
>> the etiquette of driving on them, unlike the authors of the highway code.
>
> And this "etiquette" can be found where? Or is it possible that it only
> exists amogst those that decide that the HC doesn't apply to them?

The HC was merely a statement of the bleedin' obvious. The "etiquette" is
about deciding who is going to be the one to give way, something that (in
the absence of hills and with little to choose in terms of distance) the HC
says nothing useful about. Maybe there are other vehicles following one of
the two who have met. This may make it difficult for that driver to reverse,
if only because the vehicle(s) behind fill up the passing spaces. Quite
often the other vehicle is a bus, or is towing a trailer. In that case the
onus is on the driver of the other vehicle to do the reversing even if they
are a lot further from a passing place - I didn't see any of that mentioned
in the HC. Occasionally two such vehicles meet, and then the fun really
starts.

David.

peterchecksfield@googlemail.com

I'm so glad I don't drive!!! : )))

Alex Heney

On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 02:23:07 -0700, Hamish <astra4@supanet.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
>Who in their right mind would want to take their wife & kids to a
>beach used by deviants?

So you don't think wives and children should ever be allowed to go to
beaches?

What a sad world you live in.

(Clue, almost every beach in the country is likely to be used by
"deviants").
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
"Freedom defined is freedom denied." -The Illuminatus
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney

On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:22:09 +0100, marc
<initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote:

>David Looser wrote:
>> "marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:UpednX2YQND1wSrbRVnyvQA@bt.com...
>>> 133: Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle. They
>>> may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming towards you,
>>> or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your
>>> left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give way to vehicles
>>> coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse until you reach a
>>> passing place to let the other vehicle pass.
>>
>> Which doesn't say anything useful at all, in fact is not even worth the
>> paper it's written on. You are going one way, the other driver is going the
>> other way. So who pulls into "a passing place on your left" when neither
>> driver has a "passing place on their left"?.
>The one nearest to a passing place.
>

And where, exactly, does it say that in the HC?

> Somebody has to back up (and
>> there is nothing in the HC to say which it should be),
>"Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can."
>

Yes, when you happen to be on a hill.


>
>it's only polite for
>> the other driver to acknowledge that. Even if the other driver is
>> sufficiently on the ball to realise you are coming and wait by a passing
>> place for you to pass it's *still* polite to acknowledge that.
>
>
>Polite? to acknowledge somthing so slight?

Absolutely.


>It must be fun watching you
>walk down the high street thanking all those people for not bumping into
>you or for them moving out of your way.

For something so slight?

That is orders of magnitude slighter, in that it does not put you to
*any* inconvenience normally.

But I would always hold a door for somebody close who is obviously
about to pass through, and would expect the same for myself - and
would both give and expect "thanks".

All your posts are doing in this thread is to paint yourself as rather
rude.

>>
>> Where I live most roads are single track. Believe me I am well aware of the
>> etiquette of driving on them, unlike the authors of the highway code.
>
>And this "etiquette" can be found where? Or is it possible that it only
>exists amogst those that decide that the HC doesn't apply to them?

No,, it exists among all those who are reasonable members of human
society.

And there is NO suggestion that the HC does not apply. Just that it
doesn't really say anything useful there.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Duncan Heenan

<rick.beckley@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1186370026.195782.185070@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>I was on Fraisthorpe beach at Bridlington today and was spoken to by a
> policeman. He asked me why I believed that it was a nudist beach to
> which I replied that there were other naked people there. He informed
> me in no uncertain terms that nudity was not allowed on the beach and
> took my name and address. He told me that I would be prosecuted for
> indecent exposure if I was naked on the beach again.
>
> I do not believe that I was doing anything wrong. I was naked on the
> beach reading a book. How can the police get away with intimidation
> like this?
>
> Any ideas on how I can complain?

Contact chairman@british-naturism.org.uk
This is exactly the sort of police behaviour BN should be campaigning
against.

Alex Heney

On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:10:49 +0100, marc
<initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
>Leaving aside the fact that you have said that the only beach you would
>take your wife to is "beach"...
>

No it isn't.

Morfa means "sea marsh".

>That's the morfa where it is reported ( but not to the police) that
>children are videoed on the beach, you seem to have a deviant version of
>"ok"!
>

He does rather, doesn't he.

And he seems to live in a very black and white world.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Life would be easier if I had the source code.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney

On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <astra4@supanet.com> wrote:

<snip>

>>
>> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
>> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>>

>
>You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
>have. Kind regards, Hamish

So it doesn't happen?

I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.

I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Hamish

On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> >> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
> >> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>
> >You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
> >have. Kind regards, Hamish
>
> So it doesn't happen?
>
> I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>
> I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
> infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
> --
> Alex Heney, Global Villager
> It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
> To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
your smug conceited bigoted world. Let me ask you one question.
Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish

marc

Hamish wrote:
> On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
>>>> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>>> You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
>>> have. Kind regards, Hamish
>> So it doesn't happen?
>>
>> I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>>
>> I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
>> infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
>> --
>> Alex Heney, Global Villager
>> It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
>> To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
>
> Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
> your smug conceited bigoted world. Let me ask you one question.
> Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
> deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish
>


Would you?

Oh yes I remember now, you do, but as long as you don't see it that's fine!
As you have admitted to using Nelson's telescope would it be OK if
everyone else used it?

Hamish

On 8 Aug, 09:04, marc <initial.surn...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Hamish wrote:
> > On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >>>> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
> >>>> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
> >>> You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
> >>> have. Kind regards, Hamish
> >> So it doesn't happen?
>
> >> I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>
> >> I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
> >> infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
> >> --
> >> Alex Heney, Global Villager
> >> It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
> >> To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
>
> > Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
> > your smug conceited bigoted world. Let me ask you one question.
> > Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
> > deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish
>
> Would you?
>
> Oh yes I remember now, you do, but as long as you don't see it that's fine!
> As you have admitted to using Nelson's telescope would it be OK if
> everyone else used it?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

My dear Marc, yes i am happy to take my wife to Morfa because on the
few occasions we have been, we have not seen anything untoward, tho
i am fairly sure there is plenty going on out of sight in the dunes.
If those guys want to infect themselves then i don`t have a problem
with that, as long as they do it out of sight of decent folks. Live
& let live! It`s the exhibitionists i have a problem with.
PS If anyone is looking for Nelsons` telescope i think i know where
it is. Kind regards, Hamish

freecospirit@blueyonder.co.uk

On 8 Aug, 08:53, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
> On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > >> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
> > >> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>
> > >You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
> > >have. Kind regards, Hamish
>
> > So it doesn't happen?
>
> > I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>
> > I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
> > infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
> > --
> > Alex Heney, Global Villager
> > It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
> > To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
>
> Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
> your smug conceited bigoted world. Let me ask you one question.
> Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
> deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I visited the beach at Morfa last year and whilst there may have been
deviants in the dunes in the distance the main part of the beach was
occupied by naturist couples, singles and families including a number
ofchildren. Sadly around most naturist beaches you do get you do get
a few deviants lurking round the edges. However though we would prefer
them not to be there they do not stop us from enjoying the beach as
naturists. The beauty of the beach at Morfa is its sheer size and
openess which means they you can get well away from the deviants in
the dunes and have a great time sunbathing, swimming and enjoying
other non-deviant activities.

Take the wife and children - absolutely it is perfectly safe - you
will all have a great time.

As for Marc - words fail me .

marc

freecospirit@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On 8 Aug, 08:53, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>> On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
>>>>> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>>>> You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
>>>> have. Kind regards, Hamish
>>> So it doesn't happen?
>>> I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>>> I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
>>> infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.
>>> --
>>> Alex Heney, Global Villager
>>> It's a fine line between fishing & standing still
>>> To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
>> Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
>> your smug conceited bigoted world. Let me ask you one question.
>> Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
>> deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I visited the beach at Morfa last year and whilst there may have been
> deviants in the dunes in the distance the main part of the beach was
> occupied by naturist couples, singles and families including a number
> ofchildren. Sadly around most naturist beaches you do get you do get
> a few deviants lurking round the edges. However though we would prefer
> them not to be there they do not stop us from enjoying the beach as
> naturists. The beauty of the beach at Morfa is its sheer size and
> openess which means they you can get well away from the deviants in
> the dunes and have a great time sunbathing, swimming and enjoying
> other non-deviant activities.
>
> Take the wife and children - absolutely it is perfectly safe - you
> will all have a great time.
>
> As for Marc - words fail me .

As is proved by your Englishman abroad use of foreign languages.

David Looser

"marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:O8adnev2QKRmUiTbRVnyggA@bt.com...
>
> As is proved by your Englishman abroad use of foreign languages.

Hardly new though is it? What about the River Avon?

David.

marc

David Looser wrote:
> "marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:O8adnev2QKRmUiTbRVnyggA@bt.com...
>> As is proved by your Englishman abroad use of foreign languages.
>
> Hardly new though is it? What about the River Avon?
>
> David.
>
>

Is that the one in Stratford upon Avon or the one in Aberafan?

David Looser

"marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:u7ydndtcLMnTSiTbnZ2dnUVZ8tHinZ2d@bt.com...
> David Looser wrote:
>> "marc" <initial.surname@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:O8adnev2QKRmUiTbRVnyggA@bt.com...
>>> As is proved by your Englishman abroad use of foreign languages.
>>
>> Hardly new though is it? What about the River Avon?
>>
>> David.
>>
>>
>
> Is that the one in Stratford upon Avon or the one in Aberafan?

Either

David.

Alex Heney

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:53:47 -0700, Hamish <astra4@supanet.com> wrote:

>On 8 Aug, 01:17, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 01:52:51 -0700, Hamish <ast...@supanet.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> As to whether you have seen any untoward behaviour on that particular
>> >> beach I suggest you read "heavyhorses" post from 11:08 yesterday- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >You are a silly billy. Heavyhorses may have seen something but i never
>> >have. Kind regards, Hamish
>>
>> So it doesn't happen?
>>
>> I know who *I* think is the "silly billy" around here.
>>
>> I often disagree, quite strongly, with Marc, but his views are
>> infintely preferable to your conceited and bigoted ones.

>
>Dear Mr. Heney, it is i who am very happy that i have no access to
>your smug conceited bigoted world.

PKB. In a BIG way.

> Let me ask you one question.
>Would you take your wife & kids to a beach known to be used by
>deviants? A simple yes or no will suffice. Kind regards, Hamish

It is a meaningless question, so I cannot give a simple yes or no
answer.

What is a "deviant"?

Almost everybody is "deviant" in the eyes of some people, and I have
no idea what you consider a "deviant".
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It works better if you plug it in.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 03:52:24 -0700, Hamish <astra4@supanet.com> wrote:

<snip>

>My dear Marc, you seem to getting hot under the collar (using naughty
>words, tut tut ) To me you are nothing more than a jackanape & all
>insults from people inferior to myself i take as compliments.

That phrase "people inferior to myself" says an awful lot about you
(and not anything good in the eyes of most modern people).

And combined with your attitude to your wife (you "take" her to the
beach, rather than her accompanying you to the beach - very strongly
implying a patriarchal view where she does what you allow her to), you
come across as somebody with VERY outmoded views.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
The future isn't what it used to be.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom