|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Apr 23, 2024 18:03:44 GMT
What pudding would you serve after Lasagne, salad and garlic bread? Either of the two pictured in your avatar.
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 23, 2024 18:09:42 GMT
Mint and chocolate viennetta - the layers compliment the lasagne design. Alternative! By the way, if you ever want to make a vegetarian lasagne (or mousaka) just substitute finely chopped mushrooms (choose a mixture of earthy ones) instead of mince - I actually think it tastes better.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Apr 23, 2024 18:13:41 GMT
Ziti is similar to lasagne but the main diff is using mozz and ricotta cheese.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 23, 2024 18:13:50 GMT
Not the first dessert that springs to mind to follow lasagne to be honest. More the sort of thing a British Northerner would choose to follow his chip barm.
|
|
|
Post by metanoia on Apr 23, 2024 18:18:11 GMT
Tiramisu
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 23, 2024 18:22:21 GMT
Not the first dessert that springs to mind to follow lasagne to be honest. More the sort of thing a British Northerner would choose to follow his chip barm. Ah, the simple brained southerner thinks they have barm cakes all over the north. I'd make the goosegog meringyou with my own fair hands, not for the first time either.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 23, 2024 18:26:03 GMT
Why, did you find your spawn under a gooseberry bush? On that topic my mum went into labour pulling rhubarb in the garden. Apparently I was reluctant to put much effort in and took a while. Plus ca change...
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Apr 23, 2024 18:39:41 GMT
It crossed my mind but might it be a little clichéd?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 23, 2024 18:50:17 GMT
Why, did you find your spawn under a gooseberry bush? True fact here. "Gooseberry bush" is a euphemism for female pubic hair.
|
|
|
Post by cds on Apr 23, 2024 18:52:12 GMT
I hadn't originally intended to start this topic with a post about C&RT's theft of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship in Canning Dock, Liverpool on 19 September 2016, but as it's almost certainly Parry and co.'s highest ever value boat theft scam in terms of vessel value and unrecoverable outlay by the Trust, doing so is probably quite apt : -- __________________________________________________________________________________________________ On 21 May, on the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan said: The one thing I would like to learn is how Tony and Bigred plan to get Planet back from whoever now claims to own it, particularly as Tony told us a couple of pages ago that CRT have already convinced a judge to lift an injunction preventing its sale. Is there a judge in the land that isn't going to come down on CRTs side should anything ever get to court? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ The answer to the first part of your question is of need quite lengthy and complex. The answer to the part of it about the likelihood of continuing Judicial approval of C&RT's conduct was in a post of mine on page 12 of the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan. It's buried, along with some other bona fide posts, amongst a lot of TB goon squad garbage, . .so it's hardly surprising that you missed it. The specious arguments that C&RT's lawyers relied on, at the Injunction hearing in Chester on 19 December 2016, to convince the Court of the Trust's entitlement to sell the ship - the obscure circuitous mainstay of them being that a termination clause in the annually renewable Berthing Licence Agreement gave the Trust the absolute right to seize the ship and sell it if it remained in the South Docks post expiry of the BLA - would never have stood up to careful examination, . . and C&RT's lawyers knew it. In the event, the Judge felt no need to expend Court time in allowing the applicant to expose C&RT's ridiculous assertions for what they truly were, having been seriously misled - by false written evidence included with supporting documentation submitted prior to the hearing - into believing that the seizure of "Planet" on 19 September 2016 was executed under a High Court Warrant. The false written evidence - giving the impression that the seizure of "Planet" was pursuant to earlier proceedings at which High Court approval had been gained by the Trust - was retracted and replaced in the C&RT case files with an alternative and truthful version of events at some unknown time in the aftermath of the lifting of the interim Injunction that was preventing the sale of "Planet", and of the sham 'sale' of the ship for a mere £12,500, by the C&RT, . . to the man to whom its care had been entrusted, Steve Beacham, of Sharpness Shipyard & Drydock. ______________________________________________________________________ Here's the post that was buried amongst the diversionary twaddle : - "The full extent of C&RT's knowing lies and deception relating to the unlawful seizure of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship "Planet" was truly breath-taking, John. The so-called 'Bailiffs', the bill for whom came to £4,500, were just as phony and uncertificated as the "Trust instructed" - (to quote the Trust's Solicitor-Advocate, Lucy "the lawgiver" Barry) - supposed 'Bailiffs' who were sent to evict me from and seize "Halcyon Daze".
In common with the bogus Bailiffs who, with the active assistance of four of Nottinghamshire's thickest, took "HD" from its Barton Wharf mooring on 22 October last, the uncertificated, unidentifiable goons who seized "Planet" carried no written Court authorization of any sort. They did, however, together with the local C&RT managers and representatives, state to the Police and others that they were - quote - "enforcing a High Court Warrant" - authorizing the seizure and removal of the ship.
The County Court money claim you mentioned was in fact in process in the Liverpool County Court at the time of the unlawful seizure of the ship, and Judgment, for something in the region of £5,650 (including costs), was in fact entered at Court on the day "Planet" entered the Bristol Channel under tow. It was a straightforward, everyday County Court money claim Judgment, and C&RT were fully aware that the Judgment would not, and in fact could not, include any instructions or authorization from the Court to levy distress on the ship.
The next strategic deployment of the "High Court Warrant" lie by C&RT and it's lawyers came 3 months after the unlawful seizure of the ship when, at the High Court in Chester on 19 December 2016, C&RT persuaded HHJ Pearce to lift the Injunction preventing them from selling "Planet" on the back of written evidence submitted to the Court indicating that the ship had been seized in Liverpool on 19 September 2016 pursuant to a High Court Warrant.
For the last 4 years and 5 months, C&RT, and its shyster lawyers, have been kidding themselves that they've got away with that one. They need to think again !" just so you all know what this thread is about.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Apr 24, 2024 6:23:12 GMT
I hadn't originally intended to start this topic with a post about C&RT's theft of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship in Canning Dock, Liverpool on 19 September 2016, but as it's almost certainly Parry and co.'s highest ever value boat theft scam in terms of vessel value and unrecoverable outlay by the Trust, doing so is probably quite apt : -- __________________________________________________________________________________________________ On 21 May, on the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan said: The one thing I would like to learn is how Tony and Bigred plan to get Planet back from whoever now claims to own it, particularly as Tony told us a couple of pages ago that CRT have already convinced a judge to lift an injunction preventing its sale. Is there a judge in the land that isn't going to come down on CRTs side should anything ever get to court? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ The answer to the first part of your question is of need quite lengthy and complex. The answer to the part of it about the likelihood of continuing Judicial approval of C&RT's conduct was in a post of mine on page 12 of the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan. It's buried, along with some other bona fide posts, amongst a lot of TB goon squad garbage, . .so it's hardly surprising that you missed it. The specious arguments that C&RT's lawyers relied on, at the Injunction hearing in Chester on 19 December 2016, to convince the Court of the Trust's entitlement to sell the ship - the obscure circuitous mainstay of them being that a termination clause in the annually renewable Berthing Licence Agreement gave the Trust the absolute right to seize the ship and sell it if it remained in the South Docks post expiry of the BLA - would never have stood up to careful examination, . . and C&RT's lawyers knew it. In the event, the Judge felt no need to expend Court time in allowing the applicant to expose C&RT's ridiculous assertions for what they truly were, having been seriously misled - by false written evidence included with supporting documentation submitted prior to the hearing - into believing that the seizure of "Planet" on 19 September 2016 was executed under a High Court Warrant. The false written evidence - giving the impression that the seizure of "Planet" was pursuant to earlier proceedings at which High Court approval had been gained by the Trust - was retracted and replaced in the C&RT case files with an alternative and truthful version of events at some unknown time in the aftermath of the lifting of the interim Injunction that was preventing the sale of "Planet", and of the sham 'sale' of the ship for a mere £12,500, by the C&RT, . . to the man to whom its care had been entrusted, Steve Beacham, of Sharpness Shipyard & Drydock. ______________________________________________________________________ Here's the post that was buried amongst the diversionary twaddle : - "The full extent of C&RT's knowing lies and deception relating to the unlawful seizure of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship "Planet" was truly breath-taking, John. The so-called 'Bailiffs', the bill for whom came to £4,500, were just as phony and uncertificated as the "Trust instructed" - (to quote the Trust's Solicitor-Advocate, Lucy "the lawgiver" Barry) - supposed 'Bailiffs' who were sent to evict me from and seize "Halcyon Daze".
In common with the bogus Bailiffs who, with the active assistance of four of Nottinghamshire's thickest, took "HD" from its Barton Wharf mooring on 22 October last, the uncertificated, unidentifiable goons who seized "Planet" carried no written Court authorization of any sort. They did, however, together with the local C&RT managers and representatives, state to the Police and others that they were - quote - "enforcing a High Court Warrant" - authorizing the seizure and removal of the ship.
The County Court money claim you mentioned was in fact in process in the Liverpool County Court at the time of the unlawful seizure of the ship, and Judgment, for something in the region of £5,650 (including costs), was in fact entered at Court on the day "Planet" entered the Bristol Channel under tow. It was a straightforward, everyday County Court money claim Judgment, and C&RT were fully aware that the Judgment would not, and in fact could not, include any instructions or authorization from the Court to levy distress on the ship.
The next strategic deployment of the "High Court Warrant" lie by C&RT and it's lawyers came 3 months after the unlawful seizure of the ship when, at the High Court in Chester on 19 December 2016, C&RT persuaded HHJ Pearce to lift the Injunction preventing them from selling "Planet" on the back of written evidence submitted to the Court indicating that the ship had been seized in Liverpool on 19 September 2016 pursuant to a High Court Warrant.
For the last 4 years and 5 months, C&RT, and its shyster lawyers, have been kidding themselves that they've got away with that one. They need to think again !" Three years on, and the brown nosing C&RT apologists persist in trotting out the same sort of mindless tripe they put in the immediate reponses to the post above.
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Apr 24, 2024 6:38:58 GMT
Why, did you find your spawn under a gooseberry bush? True fact here. "Gooseberry bush" is a euphemism for female pubic hair. That makes sense!
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Apr 24, 2024 7:16:02 GMT
I hadn't originally intended to start this topic with a post about C&RT's theft of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship in Canning Dock, Liverpool on 19 September 2016, but as it's almost certainly Parry and co.'s highest ever value boat theft scam in terms of vessel value and unrecoverable outlay by the Trust, doing so is probably quite apt : -- __________________________________________________________________________________________________ On 21 May, on the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan said: The one thing I would like to learn is how Tony and Bigred plan to get Planet back from whoever now claims to own it, particularly as Tony told us a couple of pages ago that CRT have already convinced a judge to lift an injunction preventing its sale. Is there a judge in the land that isn't going to come down on CRTs side should anything ever get to court? __________________________________________________________________________________________________ The answer to the first part of your question is of need quite lengthy and complex. The answer to the part of it about the likelihood of continuing Judicial approval of C&RT's conduct was in a post of mine on page 12 of the "Grumpy Dunk" thread, duncan. It's buried, along with some other bona fide posts, amongst a lot of TB goon squad garbage, . .so it's hardly surprising that you missed it. The specious arguments that C&RT's lawyers relied on, at the Injunction hearing in Chester on 19 December 2016, to convince the Court of the Trust's entitlement to sell the ship - the obscure circuitous mainstay of them being that a termination clause in the annually renewable Berthing Licence Agreement gave the Trust the absolute right to seize the ship and sell it if it remained in the South Docks post expiry of the BLA - would never have stood up to careful examination, . . and C&RT's lawyers knew it. In the event, the Judge felt no need to expend Court time in allowing the applicant to expose C&RT's ridiculous assertions for what they truly were, having been seriously misled - by false written evidence included with supporting documentation submitted prior to the hearing - into believing that the seizure of "Planet" on 19 September 2016 was executed under a High Court Warrant. The false written evidence - giving the impression that the seizure of "Planet" was pursuant to earlier proceedings at which High Court approval had been gained by the Trust - was retracted and replaced in the C&RT case files with an alternative and truthful version of events at some unknown time in the aftermath of the lifting of the interim Injunction that was preventing the sale of "Planet", and of the sham 'sale' of the ship for a mere £12,500, by the C&RT, . . to the man to whom its care had been entrusted, Steve Beacham, of Sharpness Shipyard & Drydock. ______________________________________________________________________ Here's the post that was buried amongst the diversionary twaddle : - "The full extent of C&RT's knowing lies and deception relating to the unlawful seizure of the ex-Liverpool Bar Lightship "Planet" was truly breath-taking, John. The so-called 'Bailiffs', the bill for whom came to £4,500, were just as phony and uncertificated as the "Trust instructed" - (to quote the Trust's Solicitor-Advocate, Lucy "the lawgiver" Barry) - supposed 'Bailiffs' who were sent to evict me from and seize "Halcyon Daze".
In common with the bogus Bailiffs who, with the active assistance of four of Nottinghamshire's thickest, took "HD" from its Barton Wharf mooring on 22 October last, the uncertificated, unidentifiable goons who seized "Planet" carried no written Court authorization of any sort. They did, however, together with the local C&RT managers and representatives, state to the Police and others that they were - quote - "enforcing a High Court Warrant" - authorizing the seizure and removal of the ship.
The County Court money claim you mentioned was in fact in process in the Liverpool County Court at the time of the unlawful seizure of the ship, and Judgment, for something in the region of £5,650 (including costs), was in fact entered at Court on the day "Planet" entered the Bristol Channel under tow. It was a straightforward, everyday County Court money claim Judgment, and C&RT were fully aware that the Judgment would not, and in fact could not, include any instructions or authorization from the Court to levy distress on the ship.
The next strategic deployment of the "High Court Warrant" lie by C&RT and it's lawyers came 3 months after the unlawful seizure of the ship when, at the High Court in Chester on 19 December 2016, C&RT persuaded HHJ Pearce to lift the Injunction preventing them from selling "Planet" on the back of written evidence submitted to the Court indicating that the ship had been seized in Liverpool on 19 September 2016 pursuant to a High Court Warrant.
For the last 4 years and 5 months, C&RT, and its shyster lawyers, have been kidding themselves that they've got away with that one. They need to think again !" Three years on, and the terminally stupid brown nosing C&RT apologists, . . despite the fact that thanks to this sick joke of a navigation authority, they're running out of useable, open to navigation waterways to boat about on, . . persist in trotting out the same sort of mindless tripe they put in the immediate reponses to the post above back then.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Apr 24, 2024 7:29:45 GMT
I suppose the ubiquitous Sticky Toffee pudding is too heavy, sweet and sticky?
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Apr 24, 2024 10:45:37 GMT
I suppose the ubiquitous Sticky Toffee pudding is too heavy, sweet and sticky? It had crossed my mind as it is a favourite of mine, but as you say, a little heavy for the occasion.
|
|