It appears that a senior councillor is to resign following certain revelations. Predictions are that the Recovery Board may be forced to step in and require the resignation of the entire Executive within weeks. Details are garbled so if you have any clearer information, post it in comments....
UPDATE: The councillor who has gone is the Conservative Mr Goronwy Parry who represents Valley. It appears that he has been forced out by Council Leader, Clive McGregor, and Interim MD, David Bowles, for "undermining the council's recovery" by supporting the expelled Cllr Barrie Durkin. Apparently Parry sent the following letter to Durkin after the latter was expelled from the Original Independents group and isolated within the council:
"I write to you as a friend although you may doubt this after last night's events. I regret any hurt that you have felt and understand how you must feel. There are many members of the group who feel your hurt. You may think that your friends have left you, but the truth is that they are still there and will miss you. I admire your forthrightness, your sincerity and your firmness that there is a difference between right and wrong. Take this opportunity to carry out you intentions. In time you will return in an important capacity within the group. Don't forget that the foot-soldiers of the group are still your friends"
UPDATE 2: In a letter to all councillors yesterday, IOACC Interim MD, David Bowles, has responded to Barrie Durkin's press release:
Dear Councillor
Allegations made by Councillor Durkin in respect of Town Improvement Grant and Housing Grant
Members will be aware of an increasing number of smears and allegations made by Councillor Durkin. Some of these are directed at me and my general approach is not to dignify them with any comment at all. I do, however, feel that I must comment when these allegations refer to other officers of the Council.
I am, therefore, compelled to write to you following a letter of the 6th April which I understand was forwarded by Councillor Durkin to all elected members of the Council and copied to the Chairperson of Recovery Board. Similar allegations have appeared elsewhere.
This letter is in response to the unsubstantiated allegation repeated by Councillor Durkin of a fraudulent conspiracy relating to Town Improvement Grants and Housing Grants which, he alleges, involves “senior officers”.
I am aware of the particular case to which Councillor Durkin refers as he raised the matter with both me and the Leader. In particular Councillor Durkin wrote to me on the 21st March raising his concerns.
You will appreciate that I will not identify the case in question for reasons which, I think, will be obvious when you have read this letter.
Having asked for an explanation from relevant officers, I replied to Councillor Durkin by e-mail on the 26th March. Councillor Durkin replied the same day to say “thank you for your reply and take full notice of what you say.”
What I told Councillor Durkin then was that there had already been an extensive investigation taking around 120 days by Internal Audit into this matter and that the matter had been referred to External Audit. It should also have been clear from that reply that if there were concerns they were not within the Council.
I can confirm to you that no evidence has been found to substantiate the allegation that “some senior officers are involved in a fraudulent conspiracy”.
I am not aware that Councillor Durkin has any evidence to substantiate such a serious allegation and, if he has evidence, he has not presented it to me.
There are certain recommendations arising out of the investigation as regards procedures and future administration of grants but there is no evidence of any criminal act by officers be that by way of a conspiracy or otherwise.
The investigations in respect of this case have raised questions with regard to the applicant and certain agents employed by the applicant. Some terms of the grant have not been complied with and the Council has requested re-payment of the grant monies.
The Council is only responsible for payment of the Home Improvement Grants. It is not responsible for the Town Improvement Grant as that is funded by the Welsh Assembly Goverment.
I must let you decide what public interest there may be in Councillor Durkin having circulated such a heinous allegation after I had previously responded to him. It is only right and proper that I write you this letter so that you may come to a view as to what may lie behind Councilor Durkin’s action.
UPDATE 3: In his above letter to all councillors, David Bowles refers to a letter from Cllr Barrie Durkin. As a commenter has posted the full text of that letter below, I will also add it here. Please note: I am not taking sides; I, like many Anglesey residents, have simply gotten fed up with our train-wreck of a council. Whilst Anglesey residents have this year been hit with one of the largest Council Tax rises in Wales, our council is riven with infighting and petty politics. Anglesey residents deserve better and I believe its time that a little sunlight was let in on what is going on behind the scenes. That is why I am posting these letters here.
"Dear Mr Bowles.
Since early 2004, long before I became an elected representative of the people, I was raising issues relating to breaches of planning procedural rules and failure to declare interests at Planning Committee Meeting by members of that committee, to the point where, I have even taken part in a number of television programs on the subject. Yet although I have being vindicated on all accounts, I have falsely accused of liable,sanctioned, abused, threatened, demonised and marginalised, not just in the past, but more so now, by you".
"It is clear to me, contrary to your record of fair play and routing out wrongdoing, you have shown yourself to be more akin to attacking the messenger. This has clearly manifested itself over the last week or two and will no longer be tolerated. I believe my solicitor has written to you to no avail".
So there can be no misunderstanding, I welcome intervention; it should have been here long ago, after all, the council has not been properly run since its interception in 1996.
"I welcomed and supported you in your endeavours to move the council forward. However, we clearly have a difference of opinion on how to do this.
You wish to bury the past, shove wrongdoings under the carpet, so to speak. Where I wish to see those involved in unlawful activities , who have brought the council into so much disrepute, to book. not just relating to issues of planning, but fraud and corruption".
"This brings me to the allegations of alleged fraud appertaining to grants, which I have received recently from Mr.....and his accountant Mr...... I have informed Cllr McGregor of the situation, and look forward to see what you are going to do about it".
"I point you to Anglesey County Council Constitution page 201.6(1)B and to the requirements relating to the, Fraud Act 2006,section3. Fraud by failing to disclose information".
"Again, so there can be no misunderstanding, I am more than prepared to ensure that the above requirements are met if others fail to do so".
282 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 282 of 282Druid
Is it true that the Police are already in on this and that BVUK all but shut down?
Theft and corruption.
G. Pierce
16.56 above - Internal Audit are alledging that the applicant has not paid his HRG contribution of £24,950.07, or was it £30,000 or £26,751.07.
To be honest they have`nt got a clue how much it was because the builder is the only one who knows what work he has carried out but the Grants Department prepared all of the account summaries to meet the exagerated figures presented to the applicant.
The applicant has desperately tried to tell Internal Audit and everyone else that he never paid £24,950.07 but they were not having it, you saw my blog above.
The applicant has however paid £17,625 and £10,299 to the HRG but discovered in November 2009 that his contribution was NIL anyway, which is evident and contained in two Internal Memorandums.
As for misleading the Council, if their computer print out showed no payment made by applicant, that proves that they were fully aware that I had not made a contribution.
Confusing ????
Of course it is, because although my payments were HRG, too much funding has been released by the WAG.
My HRG contribution has to be changed to TIG payments otherwise the WAG will realise that they have been defrauded and the surplus funding used to pay off the HRG invoices saving someone else money and its not the applicant.
G. Pierce
In the light of today's story in the Anglesey Mail
I've hearing that another top notch in planning has got serious problems with his planning scams
From G Pierce
Regarding Report
All the documents Internal Audit claim they have not seen - They have seen, along with their Chairman and the Council solicitor.
The letter claimed to have been used by the TIG officer to measure the work, was just a letter and not work that should have been completed by that date.
Almost every aspect of the report is flawed, evident in the Certificate of Interim Progress Payments above.
I am annoyed because they have resorted to some pure lies which I can prove.
G. Pierce
I'm putting the agents invoices up on Scribd. You can deduce the cost portrayed to Mr Pierce as they charge 10% of the contract value.
Please note the previous agent prepared the architectural drawings, specifications, preambles, schedule of work and dealt with the tendering process.
The WAG paid the previous agent £6,200 in respect of the TIG and Mr Pierce paid an additional £1,555, making a total of £7,755 in respect of TIG fees.
F. A. O. - BARRIE IMPOSTER - WE HAVE YOUR URL ADDRESS.
YOU WILL BE EXPOSED FOR WRITING LIBELOUS COMMENTS ON THE BLOG IN BARRIE'S NAME AND POSTING A SCREEN-PRINT TO THE OMBUDSMAN.
DICKHEAD,
The complainants are always wrong, remember that you, you, the public will always be treated unfairly by this Council, complaints about any part of the Council, are ignored.
We have a hard choice, either put up or shut up, some of us have had it really hard, and no one cared, now we wait, we wait for the Police to come in to question the crooks, or one complainant will take the fight to them in Llangefni, and he will be arrested, by the Police, and then he can have a proper opportunity to tell the world, how awfully he has been treated, by this bunch.
Huw Terry
Dear Mr Durkin,
Could you advise through these pages where one might find your comments in the annals of the Planning Department 'appertaining to' the approval given for a bungalow on the point at Traeth Bychan, This project is on your territory and so one must assume was dealt with by yourself and the relevant community Council, this I think is the 'legal' requirement.
Devoted
0'h what a gaff.
How can Mr David Bowles as the so-called trouble shooter sent in by the Welsh Assembly to move IOACC forward, expect any of us to take him seriously when he just tells lies to get the Council out of trouble.
In his letter to all Councillors, as can be seen in UP DATE 2, David Bowles says. "The Council is only responsible for payments for the Home Improvement Grant, It is not responsible for the Town Improvement Grant as this is funded by the Welsh Assembly Government"!
The Town Improvement Grant, Internal Audit Report. March 2010 Final, makes it clear on Pages 18 & 19 that the Council is Responsible as the Welsh Assembly's Agents in the matter.
"Extract of Main Terms and Conditions of the Agent Agreement".
"(A) The Council to act as agent in regards of the Marketing, Investigation and Monitoring of Town Improvement Grants".
"(C) The Council to institute effective procedures to carry out its obligations referred in paragraph 2 of the Terms and Conditions and to ensure compliance with the Town Improvement Explanation Manual, issued by the WDA, the Code of Practice on Financial Procedures and the Welsh Office Urban Development Guidelines".
"(D) The Council will provide adequate and competent staff for the administration of the TIG and will nominate one officer to act as a contact point at the Council.For Applicants".
"(L) The Council will accept responsibility for and indemnify and keep indemnified the WDA against all losses, actions,costs, demands and expenses arising from any negligent act or omission in the operation and administration of the TIG scheme".
"(N) The Council shall be entitled to receive an administration fee".
So come on Mr Bowles, you'll have to do a lot better than that to cover up the Councils fraud and corruption, we've seen it all before.
With the recent revelations that it took Cllr Durkin, over two years in the face of threats and abuse from the previous Managing Director, to force the Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer, to make a "retrospective planning application in order to regularise works she'd done without the necessary planning consent". Refusing to do so until forced, only goes to show how deep routed the dishonesty is within IOACC and David Bowles still supports her!
If it were a member of the public, she as the Director of Legal, would have hung them out to dry long ago.
Her position is untenable, she should be told to go.
Barrie Durkin has clearly proven the Head of Legal Services has acted improper in respect her own personal planning application. Prima-facie, a clear-cut case of maladministration.
David Bowles should be addressing the real issues at heart and not reprimanding Barrie for exposing irregular practices.
Well Said 14:55
I would go much further than that. Councillor Durkin has attempted to get this affair dealt with since 2006 and all he received in reply was threatening and abusive letter's from the Managing Director, of the time.
It has taken Councillor Durkin, until now, with the help of the Planning Authorities, Enforcement Team, to get anywhere at all.
In my opinion this is not just a case of maladministration, but shear dishonesty.
She accepted the Conditions to her Planning Approval, then knowingly refused to adhere to them, till forced to do so. Is it wonder that we are all being tarred with the same brush.
With that sort of example being set by the top Legal Officer of the Council, the Council deserves all it gets.
She should be sacked.
What a complete balls up, she is unlikely to roll over and will bounce back unless kicked into touch.
Barrie Durkin has already slotted her between the posts.
Tomorrow, the necessary Serious Fraud Office Complaint Form will be posted to Mr Durkin, its progress will be advised and monitored. Let's see what happens.
OTB
OTB 17:35
When did you say your 6th Birth (P DAY) was?
OTB says - "its progress will be advised and monitored"
I was unaware IOACC officers deal with SFO complaints.
The SFO has nothing to do with IOACC officers,
they will accept and look at detailed reports.
OTB
Am I right in saying that SFO are not Council employee's but they accept detailed reports and advise the Council who they are monitoring.
To All
Cllr Durkin ready to tell all.
The word in Llangefni tonight, is that Cllr Durkin is now ready to expose all which includes some big fish.
Top brass are said to be battering down the hatches in the wake of the Director of Legal Services's bad behaviour exposed in the Press this week
I am also told by a very good source in council, that she has been told to seriously consider her position and move on.
Watch this space.
"Refusing to do so until forced, only goes to show how deep routed [sic]the dishonesty is within IOACC and David Bowles still supports her!"
Deep rooted does seem to be the term. I've realised over the past year, as I ask very precise, detailed and valid questions of the Council, that the higher up the ladder you enquire about, the less they are willing to be open. In some cases, they either willfully ignore the law, or don't understand it. This ignorance extends to their own solicitors.
It must be ludicrous for Bowles to support Ball under the circumstances. If there was nothing wrong with her property, she wouldn't have needed to retrospectively apply for permission. There was, and she did. Ergo, she cannot sit there with a senior official next to her bleating 'whiter than white, us'.
It's a sham, people. A shame, too. Someone now needs to highlight these failings in the media. I understand a couple of outlets are preparing material for publication soon.
We await, with baited breath, for scandals yet untold, which we are told leads all the way to the top. We await............
'God' is not involved he has problems of his own
Druid
Friday Night, Just Left the Office.
Cllr Durkin has spent a lot of time to day looking through planning files.
Some of the senior staff are openly crapping themselves and stabbing one and other in the back.
I think Lynn Ball has grassed the who bloody lot up.
What do you think of that Bowles, do you still support them now?
IOACC employee who's being told not to talk to Cllr Durkin, in case i might let the cat out of the bag.
03-04-1952
Internal Audit could be prosecuted under Section 3 Fraud Act 2006 and the thieves banged to rights under Section 17 Theft Act 1967.
There is sufficient evidence to secure fraud and corruption charges against the conspirators and Internal Audit Reports show they have knowingly misled Mr Pierce.
OTB - You have left footprints in the snow.
Anon 10:44 - OMG why are they not being prosecuted !! - maybe the Crown Prosecution Service know something we do not i.e lack of evidence ?
Anon 19:26 - wow you had snow at this time of year - cor!
For anybody who may have only just joined us, this tale involves according to some wrongdoing by:
Councilors, Council Officers, Internal Audit, External Audit, Welsh Office, Welsh Assembly, Police, Freemasons, Daily Post, Holyhead and Angelsey Mail, HTV and BBC and this innocent blog.
And please you people who have said these things, do not tell us all about them again, we are not prosecutors, and if you think the world is against you, we really do not care!
I doubt very much the CPS has seen all the evidence because it's still with Mr G Pierce and a raft of evidence has emerged since the Police looked at the case.
Sorry but I disagree - I like the way you twist a very straight-forward case of theft by false accounting into a conspiracy theory.
It's a case of hook, line and sinker.
Can someone please explain why Internal Audit Reports differ so much when all relevant documents had been supplied to Mr Pierce by IOACC.
You may well ask.
To: 8th May 20:10
With sort of attitude, your clearly someone who works in high office at IOACC.
FACT - Gwynfor Pierce's accountant requested confirmation off Internal Audit and Finance Department that the remaining grant award of £18,750.01p is held on account.
In response to this request, the auditors confirmed the money has not been paid because they had checked against their creditor system of payments to see if £18,750.01p had been paid to the builder or agent.
If you have not yet gathered, this is a lucky dip method of accounting for public money. They failed to consider the possibility of the grant having been paid in more than one payment and if this was the case then it would be almost impossible to determine if the grant is held on account. They would have to try every combination for example£11,750.00p and £7,000.01p.
It would take months to check every combination and would go undetected if paid to someone other than the builder or agent.
Please remember, the two parties involved in the financial transaction (builder/applicant) are not in contact and both unaware of the contract value.
Lug
Nope, not listening anymore, bored now, just the same old comments over and over again, and just in case - I'm not from high office at the IOACC, No I'm from somewhere else completely, but I am not at liberty to say where.
Footprints in the snow are much more respectable than Sir Jasper writing his name in the snow!
Anon 00:18: I must have struck a nerve when I mentioned HRG payments of £11,750.00p and £7,000.01p.
HAHA
FAO:- Sorry but I disagree... This should help with the boredom.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31103010/Bowles-Letter-20-4-2010-Page-2
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31103010/Bowles-Letter-20-4-2010-Page-2
THERE IS ONE THING FOR SURE, DOCUMENTS ARE NOT SAFE IN IOACC, MAYBE THEY LEAVE THE WINDOWS OPEN AT NIGHT AND THEY BLOW AWAY.
13.40 above, where is page 1.
Am i right in saying that, although the Monitoring Officer has broken the law, Bowles thinks she should claim compensation from the Council ?
Here is page 1 -
http://www.scribd.com/doc/31103004/Bowles-Letter-20-4-2010-Page-1
This letter will be in the public domain this week and Barrie Durkin will come out smelling of roses.
with all the information provided by Mr Price, and since so many others are obviously looking at this site I am absolutely amazed no one else has started to contribute in the way Mr Price has.
Mr Price is not a one off, when we visit our caravan we meet friends who went through a very similar experiance.
Yeti
Will an IOACC loving Anon please annoy me so I can justify placing more highly sensitive documents in the Public domain.
Pink Panther (Erected member)
Barrie and Goronwy will be vindicated in the press later this week and rightly so.
Wouldn't surprise me if Cllr Durkin and his bunch of Lawyers aren't already working on taking. IOACC, Bowles and McGregor to the cleaners.
That f..k the bent bas.....
Druid
Me thinks, what we see here is only the tip of the iceberg. Wait till the big cons hit the fan. The council will go down like nine pins.
Councillor Durkin will finish this corrupt council off, once and for all.
Not before time.
The whole of Anglesey is behind you Barrie.
Council taxes up. Business rates up.
Factories closing. Schools closing.
Swimming baths closing. Unemployment up.
Roads not repaired. Low wages.
Ruined lives. Broken families.
Corrupt Officers. Dishonest Councillors.
Never mind at least our rulers are looking after themselves.
What a wonderful place to get fucked over.
If you think that's bad. 23:46. Wait till you see what's coming this week.
David Bowles and Carl Sargent will shit themselves,
Just put £10 on Barrie Dukin to be Xmas number 1.
He's gaining cult status as a no nonsense straight talking Councillor who will stand up for your rights.
Sorry - several comments deleted for making unsubstantiated allegations about various named persons.
Good morning Druid,
When you make deletions would it be possible for you to indicate the (by time) the Blog for which the cuts have been made ?
Good morning Anon 09:18. Okay, in future I will endeavour to report the timestamps of comments which I delete.
IOACC Internal Memorandum 09:52:01 hrs - Carl Sergant will be arriving by helicopter later this afternoon to address the full Council.
Good afternoon Barrie,
Now that you have received the SFO complaint forms (signed for on Saturday) per AG698817897GB, we hope to see that you send all the evidence as quickly as possible. Please be good enough to post the postal reference number on here so we can see it has gone.
Your old 'friends' Brian & Co. OTB
Clive McGregor and his group, The Original Independents, are at this very moment in criss meeting in Llangefni.
Word is the groups on the verge of collapse.
The way they have treated Cllr Durkin, Cllr Parry and Cllr Schofield, they should have all gone ages a go.
We will never forget.
The ruling group in the main, is made up of honest hard working people. It's just a few like McGregor that are dishonest, and because of them and that equally dishonest, David Bowles, the whole Council is now in jeopardy.
I would say that 90% of the Council and Councillors are honest hard working people.
If the Council is in jeopardy, it is because of a greedy 10% who have been abusing the systems for more than a decade.
I think there has been a major effect of Divide and Rule. The trouble here is that the instifator has (for good or bad) set something in motion which will take a long time to stop. As sure as eggs is eggs, the instigator will one day go whence he cometh and left behind will be many broken friendships and ill feeling because so many are looking over their shoulders wondering who is good and who is bad, is the the person alongside me? etc etc. There are not that many traditional Anglesey families, a large Island funderal shows that and so what we have is relative suspecting relative, almost brother aginst brother and it is an awful situation.
Let's hope that one way or another it is settled soon. The odd thing is, until one personlit the touch paper most were ok as they were.
Resigned
19.54 above.
The only divide is good and bad.
There is no instigator. You have a man who has unearthed dishonesty and believes that before the Council can move forward these dishonest people have to be dealt with once and for all.
We have been here before remember. We are all discussing similar things that we discussed twelve years ago after the Ceri Stradling report.
I personally want the Council to succeed, they do a lot of good work, but the good work is seemingly overshadowed by a minority of corrupt senior officials.
Whether an offence or anomalie happened years ago, like a criminal in the real world, he or she should be held accountable.
Just because a David Bowles has been drafted in to move the Council forward does`nt mean forget about the past. These anomalies have been committed, offenders have knowingly broken the law and should be punished like everyone else.
If offenders are not punished or held accountable now, it will never stop. Once the pressure is off and David gets posted somewhere else, the corruption and illicit dealings will continue.
STOP IT NOW
Sorry to abbreviate you 22.28 but using the initials of your last three words gives us SIN which of course any proven allegations would be.
It would seem Brian & Co 18.06 have got it right. It is no use blogging and blogging nor is it any use Blagging and Glagging. The man who has (or so it is claimed) the real evidence now seems to have all the necessary to lodge the facts before the proper people. We can then sit back and hope they castrate corrupt conspiritors . This was not levelled at the Balls.
The Watchers
There are some stupid people in this world.
We have already spent £300,000 to pay-off DJ, and now how much is all this going to cost. No 'B' wonder our council tax has been increased many times beyond that of the previous administration.
The Watchers - The SFO will not investigate unless it's suspected fraud in excess of £1 million. Are you aware, cases of complex financial fraud are usually referred to accountants by CID to pick out the bones.
For some unknown reason Mr Pierce's case has not reached criminal investigation stage and have not considered crucial new evidence nor spoken to any of the parties involved.
I strongly suspect this is an inside job and over the years this fraud could possibly run into millions of pounds, which is very serious indeed.
Lug
Good morning Lug,
I hope your wrists are not sore !
My thought about SFO was that once they have the info on file it makes it far less easy for others to hide the reports as though they are unimportant
OTB
Comment made at 00:14 deleted.
Lug,
I find it very odd that so many are trying to play down the potential level of this and they suggest it would not come within the scope of the SFO. Anyway, apart from the idiots "we have you on CCTV" etc, the 'main man' has the necessary forms, will he use them ?
OTB B, D, & others
Dear All - several comments of a scatological nature have been removed. Such comments do not cast any more light on the situation being discussed and are likely to bring this blog into disrepute. I would like to respectfully ask commenters to refrain from making such comments as they will be deleted.
Well done Druid, things have been getting a bit childish lately. G.Pierce and Lug have been dragging down the quality of your blog for a few days now. Let's get the intelligent debate back on track.
Montoring Officer's Executive Report issued September, 2007 into Craigwen has been delivered to the press.
Brian & Co. OTB. 10th May 18:06
Does 50 High Street, ring any bells?
Now who's the idiot?
From G. Pierce
Sorry for not being as intelligent as most of you that contribute to this blog.
I suppose that anyone who complains about the Council are unintelligent to some.
G. Pierce
G.Pierce - For the record I value your contributions.
To Druid from G. Pierce,
I value your kind words. Thank you.
G. Pierce
"Now who's the idiot" 19.31
YOU ARE THE ABSOLUTE IDIOT, but never mind mummy will change you nappy
OTB & co
Back to you again 19.31 "Idiot"
If you go to Royal Mail, put in the tracking number, go for proof of receipt yes you will get the address of the Post Office, that is obvious not clever. Now then, Mr hunter of the corrupt, are you telling us that you are able to corrupt a Post Master and get him to show you their security CCTV,I think not, but anyway that was a waste of time wasn't is!
OTB
Back to the Hunters of the Corrupt
I have read, with interest, your intrepit comments of "illicit dealings" and unsubstantiated theories of collusion within the Senior Management of IOACC. Wahtever happened to fairness and 'innocent until proven guilty'?
Mr Pierce claims to be armed with a wealth of incriminating information that could nail these officials but any reasonably educated person can guess where this is going and dismiss such nonsense. After 120 days of investigation the Council has failed to find any wrongdoing. If Mr Pierce is that confident on bringing these officials to justice let our learned friends of this world decide who's been fiddling who, in a civilised manner.
Sending an elected member an SFO complaint form is open to interpretation.
Actually, the Royal Mail are legally bound to cooperate in establishing the name of the sender.
Anon 12:05 - Please carefully read all internal Audit Reports and get back to me.
Lug
DRUID
24 HOURS A DAY COMPUTERS ASSIST IN SECURING WORLDWIDE SAFETY AND LAWFULNESS. THOSE COMPUTERS RECOGNISE THREE/FOUR LETTER DESIGNATORS, KEY WORDS AND CERTAIN PHRASES.
EXAMPLES OF ALL HAVE APPEARED ON THESE PAGES.
CONTRIBUOTORS, WHILST ADDING TO AND ENJOYING YOUR BLOGSPOT SHOULD BE AWARE THAT FOOLISHLY ENTERED MATTER COULD LEAD TO EXAMINATION, IDENTIFICATION AND CLOSURE WHICH WOULD BE SHAME.
Little Brother
Post a Comment