Bad beat/Moan/Venting Thread - BBV Archive 2

[tylerdurden94]

Fucking brilliant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JDK2LOWjH4

[ghostface]

Kenny Motherfucking Powers

[Sledgejammer]

Fucking brilliant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JDK2LOWjH4

Any word on if there'll be a season 3? There fucking better be...

[tylerdurden94]

Any word on if there'll be a season 3? There fucking better be...

I would hope so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIQ0EhEMiSs

More snippets over HERE

[davepoke/her]

Where would you set the line on an over/under of the age of the winner of the main event?

21.

[Solskjaer]

Zuutherapy obv

[Macspower]

Very very strange one... I had a sig on a well known bullitin board where I have 000's of posts.. another guy from our company had the same sig.. It was worded in a particular way by the guy who looks after our website for SEO purposes..

For some strange reason we lost our top position on google in the last few days. now the mystry unfolds. I find my sig on that bullitin board has been changed to remove the key words required .... and so has the sig of the other guy in our company...

who would do that and why? Competitor is the only thing I can think of?

maybe some of you with more experience in modding such forums might point me in the right direction...

[Macspower]

Just watching the aftermath of oxegen... looks like they all had a good time

[Zuroph]

Why would you include your name? And if you are including the word behavioural then make sure you use the British English spelling with a 'u'.

Registering a business name is easy and only costs €20. But do it now. Go to cro.ie as Strewelpeter said. Although you fill in stuff online you have to print out the resulting form, sign it, and post it off with a cheque before you get your certificate. So send it off soon.

Chrome spellcheck messed that one up.

I'm just wary of registering a business name if I am currently not doing anything with it, can it cause problems with my JSB?

[ghostface]

Any word on if there'll be a season 3? There fucking better be...

There is, working on it now

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YPn8GjCMG0

[Macspower]

Chrome spellcheck messed that one up.

I'm just wary of registering a business name if I am currently not doing anything with it, can it cause problems with my JSB?

registering the business name should ahve no effect on your jsb. Also there is a back to work enterprise allowance available if you are on JSB but there is a lot of hoop jumping to get it.

I have been through the setting up of a business many times and again recently so if I can be of any help please don't hesitate to ask.

[Macspower]

just logged into PPP and see I have a few bob sitting there.. was looking to play a mid priced tourney something like a 50 FO or something.. but everything seems to be low stakes.. 5 and 10er tourneys make up the most of whats on..

suppose a sign of the times really

[tylerdurden94]

Mila Kunis is incredible

[Macspower]

Watching "stringer bell" in luther... really good stuff.. pity there is not enough of it!

[ghostface]

Mila Kunis is incredible

I love the girl +she seems awesome (and I hate that word!!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRfSecEIyIs

[KevIRL]

Mila Kunis is incredible

Wheres that gif of her lezzer kiss?

[Lord Sir Banter]

I love the girl +she seems awesome (and I hate that word!!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRfSecEIyIs

WTF is it with people (usually 50+) saying 'The Black Swan', it's just 'Black Swan'.
Same goes for people who make song titles longer or just pick a random line from a song and call it that.

'Hit me baby one more time', no it's just 'Baby one more time'.


Something must be done about it.

[Zuroph]

WTF is it with people (usually 50+) saying 'The Black Swan', it's just 'Black Swan'.
Same goes for people who make song titles longer or just pick a random line from a song and call it that.

'Hit me baby one more time', no it's just 'Baby one more time'.


Something must be done about it.

Don't you hate pants?!

[ghostface]

Wheres that gif of her lezzer kiss?

This aint that scene but still pretty hot one from an old movie, nsfw

SPOILER

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvQKs5rbUeY

[digiman]

Any recommendations for a weeks holiday? Would probably go in 2nd week of August. Preferably some fun active activities but also relaxing. Can be in Ireland or a couple of hours in a plane, preferably with sun if abroad.

[RoadSweeper]

[DAMO72]

Any recommendations for a weeks holiday? Would probably go in 2nd week of August. Preferably some fun active activities but also relaxing. Can be in Ireland or a couple of hours in a plane, preferably with sun if abroad.

Salou or Lanzarotte .
Salou would be my choice, nice spot for relaxing with the added entertainment of Portaventura theme park.

Porto del carmen in Lanzarotte is great craic all round

[MrsFlushdraw]

Mila Kunis is incredible

I worked with a girl who was her spit. She has no idea how stunning she is and looks amazing without makeup. She has the eyes, the lips and the figure.

[Dice75]

Salut or Lanzarotte .
Salut would be my choice, nice spot for relaxing with the added entertainment of Portaventura theme park.

Porto del carmen in Lanzarotte is great craic all round

[KevIRL]

Salut or Lanzarotte .
Salut would be my choice, nice spot for relaxing with the added entertainment of Portaventura theme park.

Porto del carmen in Lanzarotte is great craic all round

Puerto Rico in Gran Canaria is great.

[ghostface]

I worked with a girl who was her spit. She has no idea how stunning she is and looks amazing without makeup. She has the eyes, the lips and the figure.

Pics, name, ph no. and address or GTFO

[White Knight]

I worked with a girl who was her spit. She has no idea how stunning she is and looks amazing without makeup. She has the eyes, the lips and the figure.

Did you?

[dannydiamond]

Puerto Rico in Gran Canaria is great.

About 10 years since I was there but loved it,not sure if it has changed.

[Lord Sir Banter]

http://whatthefuckshouldimakefordinner.com/

[Kayroo]

Tour De France was a fucking disaster today.

[Dice75]

^^^^^^^^^^^
Rest Day today in The Tour

[DAMO72]

Puerto Rico in Gran Canaria is great.

2 many annoying brits , you know the type .
There is a couple round your way

[The Situation]

^^^^^^^^^^^
Rest Day today in The Tour

Was yesterday. He actually finished the race like that.

[Lord Sir Banter]

Sharp downturn there from Mila Kunis having the hand dropped on her by some chick. :-/

[Zuroph]

yesterday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWT8yeHGA0U

[Kayroo]

^^^^^^^^^^^
Rest Day today in The Tour

I'm a day behind cause I only get to watch it on the recorded coverage when I have a minute from work. My bad.

[Dice75]

I'm a day behind cause I only get to watch it on the recorded coverage when I have a minute from work. My bad.

Thursday is when the fun begins (or friday for you!)

[Strewelpeter]

Tambor says Arrested Development movie is going to happen

[carlop]

Any recommendations for a weeks holiday? Would probably go in 2nd week of August. Preferably some fun active activities but also relaxing. Can be in Ireland or a couple of hours in a plane, preferably with sun if abroad.

If you want to go somewhere nice and warm in Spain but a little less touristy/crowded than the standard Costa del Sol resort you could try the province of Cadiz. Basically fly to Malaga and start driving towards Portugal.

The beaches are lovely but because it's the Atlantic coast they're not as packed and I'm pretty sure you can surf, windsurf etc. The area around Tarifa, just passed Gibraltar is beautiful. I actually stayed further along the coast in a campsite which was also cool.

If you get bored of the beach there's plenty of good day trips you can do. Morocco is just across the water and you could also visit Sevilla or the town of Cadiz. I'll warn you though that Sevilla in August is extremely hot.

[greywolf]

Team Sky could take legal action if necessary after their Spanish rider Juan-Antonio Flecha was hit by a television car in Sunday's ninth stage of the Tour de France.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/11072011/58/tour-de-france-sky-sue-tv-car-crash.html

[MrsFlushdraw]

Pics, name, ph no. and address or GTFO

All I can say is her name is Lynn

Did you?

With FD as well obv

In FD's dreams maybe lol

[Zuroph]

think this might be the next play against me.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002610896504

someone add them there, I was added a while ago, but friendship was removed again.

[Kayroo]

Important: Please Take A Moment to Read

The Government, and in particular Minister Shatter, are seeking to bring in an amendment to the Constitution in order to allow them reduce the pay given to judges. While I personally believe this is an absolutely terrible idea the judges themselves, and in particular the judges of the Supreme and High Court, have taken the position that this amendment is inevitable but that the actual power to set judge's wages must be kept out of the hands of Government and given to an independent body.

Judges, as a rule, refuse to comment on matters of public controversy. However, on this particular occasion, they have released a memorandum which was given to the Government via Marie Whelan, the Attorney-General, as is the proper means for the judiciary to communicate with the Government of the day. In order to facilitate press requests this was also placed on the Courts website www.courts.ie but, after direct pressure from Minister Shatter, this will be removed tomorrow.

I urge everyone here to read a copy. A link is here and I have included the text in the spoiler below.

Over the next few months, as this issue is played out in the papers, there will be many things said about judges and their pay and what they do. I can tell you from my experience of them that they are conscientious individuals who take a pay cut quite often to be judges. The honour and dignity of the office, as well as an opportunity to be a servant to the judicial system, is the driving force for most if not all of them. Having seen many of them in action they are among the most humane, intelligent and diligent professionals one could ever hope to appear before. Please do not allow Minister Shatter to blind you with his personal agenda and rhetoric and remember that judicial independence from the Government is an absolutely vital component of a free society. The price for freedom is constant vigilance and in this instance it is my honest belief that allowing the Government the power to control judicial wages is an atrocity which we cannot allow to happen.

In a paper delivered to the Venice Commission on Judicial Independence, the Director General for the Department of Judicial Administration for Slovenia wrote the following:

In a country in which we want to establish the rule of law, we must never forget that law is, first and foremost, a promise of impartiality. It not only involves actual impartiality, but also the preservation of an appearance of impartiality. It is the latter that is the best warranty for existence of trust in the judiciary and a lawful state.

[...]

An independent position of judges has numerous aspects, from the
appointment of judges, duration of judicial office and immovability of judges, to the manners for dismissal of judges and related immunity, financial independence (remuneration of judges) and so on.

SPOILER

Re: Proposed Referendum on Article 35.5 of
The Constitution
Memorandum on the Proposed Amendment
1. No one doubts for a moment the seriousness of the economic crisis
facing the country. The judiciary has not opposed the proposal for amendment of
Article 35, section 5 of the Constitution. The ultimate decision on would, of
course, be entirely a matter for Oireachtas and the People. The issue here is
not whether judges’ pay should be reduced, but rather how that reduction should be
achieved, while effecting the least interference with the principle of independence
of the Judiciary which that provision of the Constitution is designed to protect.
Historical context
2. If judicial pay is cut, this will be the first time that this has occurred in
the legal history of these islands since the Act of Settlement 1701.
3. Article 68 of the 1922 Constitution provided that the remuneration of
judges “may not be diminished during their continuance in office”. Writing
in 1932 in his seminal text, Professor Kohn observed that: P a g e | 2
“The independence of the judges has been further safeguarded by the
provisions of Article 68 of the Constitution that their remuneration
may not be diminished during their continuance in office.”
1
4. Article 35.5 of the Constitution provides that:-
“The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his
continuance in office.”
5. During the debate on the Constitution, Deputy Norton (then leader of the
Labour Party) observed with regard to Article 35.5:-
“I take it that [Article 35.5] is intended to establish the independence
of the judiciary which function through [the High Court and the Supreme
Court] and it is probably intended to demonstrate to the community as a
whole and to judges in particular that judges are not liable to have their
salaries reduced if for any reason they do things which incur the displeasure
of the [Government].”
2
The rationale for the present rule
6. Article 35.5 of our Constitution is designed to protect judicial independence
As one of the great US Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, put it in
The Federalist Papers, No. 79 at the time of the enactment of the US
Constitution:-
“Next to permanency in office, nothing can contribute more to the
independence of the judges than a fixed provision for their support. In the
************************************************** *********
1
Kohn, Constitution of the Irish Free State (London, 1932) at 328.
2
67 Dail Debates, June 1, 1937. P a g e | 3
general course of human nature, a power over a Man’s Subsistence
amounts to a power over his Will.”
7. This principle is internationally acknowledged and cherished today. The words
of Hamilton were quoted with approval by a majority of our Supreme Court
in O’Byrne v. Minister for Finance
3
in holding that Article 35.5 did not
exempt judges from the necessity to pay income tax:
“The purpose of the Article is to safeguard the independence of
judges. To require a judge to pay taxes on his income on the same
basis as other citizens and thus to contribute to the expenses of
Government cannot be said to be an attack on his independence.”
4
8. Article III of the US Constitution provides that judicial compensation “shall not
be diminished during their Continuation in Office”, words which clearly
inspired Article 68 of the 1922 Constitution and Article 35.5 of the
Constitution.
9. The European Charter on the Statute for Judges, adopted at Strasbourg, 8 - 10
July 1998 under the auspices of the Council of Europe provides at Article 6.1:
“Judges exercising judicial functions in a professional capacity are entitled
to remuneration, the level of which is fixed so as to shield them from
pressures aimed at influencing their decisions and more generally their
behaviour within their jurisdiction, thereby impairing their independence and
impartiality.”
************************************************** *********
3
[1959] I.R. 1 at 35, per Maguire C.J.
4
[1959] IR 1 at 38, per Maguire CJ. P a g e | 4
10. On 23
rd
November 2001, the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE)
adopted Opinion No 1, which included reference to Recommendation No. R (94)
12, which provided that judges’ remuneration should be guaranteed by law and
commensurate with the dignity of their profession and burden of responsibilities
and that that it was generally important (and especially so in relation to the new
democracies) to make specific legal provision guaranteeing judicial salaries against
reduction
11. The underlying issue of principle is more complex. Mere knowledge that
the Oireachtas has the power to legislate to reduce salaries may be perceived,
even if it is not so in fact, as having the potential either to pressurise judges on
the one hand or, alternatively, make them liable to view the other branches
of government with suspicion or even hostility. In the words of one of the
most internationally respected judges in recent times, the late Lord Bingham:-
“There is also, perhaps, another and subtler link between independence and
remuneration. In most societies, and subject to obvious exceptions, there is
some perceived relationship between what someone earns and the status or
prestige which he enjoys. Financial rewards are not, of course, everything,
but nor are they nothing. Unless, therefore, the rewards of judicial office
(with or without other benefits) are sufficient to attract the ablest candidates
to accept appointment, albeit with some financial sacrifice, the ranks of the
Judiciary must be filled by the second best, those who (under our system)
have failed to make it in private practice, and there would be an inevitable
lowering in the standing and reputation of the Judiciary and a sea change in
the relationship between advocate and judge.”
5
************************************************** *********
5
Judicial Independence (OUP, 2005) P a g e | 5
12. In O’Byrne v Minister for Finance
6
, Lavery J. observed that from a
consideration of the 1922 Constitution and the corresponding provisions of
Article 35 of the Constitution that:-
“The idea emerges – that the judicial power of the State should be vested in
judges set apart in many important ways from the life of the community and
denied important civil rights in order that they should be independent in the
exercise of their functions.”
7

13. A number of significant restrictions on a member of the Judiciary are
explicit in the Constitution: disqualification from membership of the Oireachtas,
and prohibition on the holding of any other officer of emolument: Article 35.3.
Some of the constraints on the judiciary are regarded as implicit in the concept of
independence, and observed by convention since the foundation of the State : the
fact that judges do not speak or engage on matters of public controversy; the
convention that judicial appointment is normally for full service until retirement,
and that, even on retirement, a retired judge should not pursue any vocation or
employment either public or private, which is inappropriate for a judge. Nor do
the judges organise collectively. All these are understood to be components of an
independent judiciary. In return, the Constitution provides for fixity of tenure, that
a judge cannot be removed save for stated misbehaviour and then by separate
resolutions of the Dáil and Seanad (Article 35.4.1), and by a guarantee that
remuneration will not be reduced (Article 35.5).
14. It is clear that these matters are themselves essential requirements of the
independence of the judiciary which is an essential component in the concept of
separation of powers. This is why the guarantee against reduction in salaries
************************************************** *********
6
[1959] IR 1.
7
[1959] IR 1 at 40. P a g e | 6
is deeply embedded not only in the Constitution, but one finds it throughout
the constitutions and fundamental laws throughout the common law world.
15. In Canada, The Provincial Judges Reference
8
held that the reduction in
pay of provincial court judges in order to help address a budget deficit was
unconstitutional, as being inconsistent with the guarantee of judicial
independence contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. A
majority of the Canadian Supreme Court held that independent compensation
commissions are required to enable salaries to be set free of political influence.
The Court pointed out that, if remuneration of provincial judges is to be raised,
lowered or kept the same, this may be done along with the remuneration of other
government employees or with the judges' alone. The continued independence of
judges, however, will be kept apparent in any of these circumstances if it involves
review by an "independent, effective, and objective" body, i.e., the salary
commissions. What is involved in such circumstances is that, because what is
being done is to the financial disadvantage of judges, it is important that the extent
of discretionary power of the government of the day be kept to a minimum.
16. Furthermore, judges of the High Court and Supreme Court are
effectively debarred by the Rules of the Bar Council from returning to legal
practice following resignation or retirement.
9
As Kennedy C.J. put it in
James O’Connor’s case, these principles:
“reflect a common understanding underlying these [judicial]
appointments, that, with security of tenure and fixed and adequate
************************************************** *********
8
[1997] 3 SCR 3.
9
Re Sir James O’Connor’s Application [1930] IR 631, Rule 5.21 of the Code of Conduct of the Bar
(2010) provides:-
“Judges of the Irish Courts, following retirement or resignation, who return to the Bar may not practice in a
court of equal or lesser jurisdiction than the court of which they were a judge.” P a g e | 7
remuneration and pension, the practice of the profession of the law is
abandoned for ever by the person appointed.”
10
16. If, however, the constitutional principle that there be no reduction in
judicial remuneration is altered, then the basis for the permanent abandonment
by a judge of the practice of his profession is undermined. The proposition that it
is undesirable that a judge to return to practice was explained by Kennedy
C.J.:-
“There is good and powerful reason in support of such a rule, for it is
beyond doubt that if a man should step down from the privileged
position of the Bench and throw off what is a sacred office to engage
in the rough-and-tumble of litigious contest, and compete with
practitioners for the feed business of the Court, perhaps challenge the
decisions which he pronounced, or even fail to support them in
argument, he will shake the authority of the judicial limb of
government and mar the prestige and dignity of the Courts of Justice
upon which the whole structure of the State must always lean.”
11
17. There is here a question of perception and fairness. If, for example, a
High Court or Supreme Court judge returned to practice and appeared
before the High Court, then either the opposing counsel (and, more
importantly, their clients) might feel that they were at an unfair
disadvantage. But no one would be prepared to give up the right to practice
a profession permanently if they did not have the assurance of fixity of
salary and tenure of office.
************************************************** *********
10
[1930] IR 623 at 630.
11
[1930] IR 623 at 631. P a g e | 8
18. The same is true with respect to Article 35.3. Thus, for example, a
member of the Oireachtas (with whom, as we shall see, judges may be
expressly compared under the terms of the suggested wording at present available)
who is unhappy with reduction in his or her salary can, for instance,
supplement that by holding an office or position of emolument. There are
numerous instances where Oireachtas members quite properly derive income as
academics, lawyers, doctors, architects, teachers, company directors and so
forth.
19. Why, then, should this rule be maintained in such circumstances if the
quid pro quo - no reduction in pay - is being abandoned? Many continental
judges (including, for example, judges of the Court of Justice and the
German Constitutional Court) hold offices of emolument for example as
Professors in universities. Other continental judges engage in part-time
arbitration and mediation work.
20. Yet in a small jurisdiction such as ours, any relaxation of this rule
might have unfortunate consequences. Could, for example, a judge who
engaged in part-time arbitration work continue to hear arbitration cases in
his or her judicial capacity?
Fundamental flaws associated with the existing suggested wording
21. According to press reports, the approach to the amendment seems to be
grounded on the following wording, attributed to the Department of Justice:-
“The remuneration of judges shall not be reduced during their continuance in
office save as may be regulated by law on the basis of reductions that are
made by law, in the public interest, in the remuneration of persons generally P a g e | 9
or a class of such persons in the public service, including the Oireachtas and
other office holders.”
22. It is fundamental that in any proposed amendment, which seeks to protect
the independence of the judiciary, wide discretion is not left to the government of
the day (and, by extension, the Oireachtas of the day which would be
empowered to enact the appropriate legislation giving effect to the pay
reductions) as to the circumstances in which and extent to which reductions in pay
are implemented. Otherwise, there is a risk of perception that the judiciary may be
influenced by the government.
23. The suggested draft wording invites a number of comments. First, the
language is extremely loose. It would provide no limitation on the circumstances
in which a reduction should be made; the government’s view of the “public
interest” (as reflected in the legislation enacted by the Oireachtas) would
suffice. There is no method of calculating the reduction identified. The only
figure by reference to which such a reduction should be effected is contained in a
phrase of very broad potential application, namely, “in the public interest”. But
perhaps most significantly, the bodies which are to be charged with deciding the
reduction, both as to whether it is required and by reference to what comparator
such reduction should be calculated, are the other branches of government, i.e., the
Executive and Legislative branches. At a minimum it might be thought that any P a g e | 10
amendment should closely and specifically identify the circumstances in which any
deviation from the historic principles set out in Article 35.5 could be contemplated
such as a financial crisis involving the public finances accompanied by the
mechanism by which any salary reduction should be calculated, which should itself
be independent of government.
24. There would be furthermore nothing to stop the Oireachtas enacting
legislation cutting the pay of any other office holder(s) and applying that
particular pay cut to the judiciary. There is nothing in the suggested wording
of the proposed amendment to prevent a series of “tactical” cuts being
applied to different classes of public servants, but each of whom can be
applied to the judiciary.
25. The proposed wording would also provide less safeguards than that
previously proposed during the last Dáil in the 29
th
Amendment of the
Constitution Bill, 2009:-
“The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in
office, save where it is necessary to address a serious threat to the State’s
economy, there is a compelling need to stabilise the State’s finances and as a
consequence it is necessary to effect a reduction in public service
remuneration. In such circumstances, any reduction in the remuneration of
all public servants or in the remuneration of a class of public servants may
be applied to effect a comparable reduction in the remuneration of all
members of the judiciary.” P a g e | 11
26. Even then, however, that Bill would have been open to the fundamental
objection that it did not provide for an in-built mechanism for an
independent review of the levels of the reduction of judicial pay.
Conclusions
27. In our view, the suggested wording as published in the press is
fundamentally deficient and would compromise the substance of judicial
independence in the manner indicated. The principles of judicial
independence require that any decision regarding judicial remuneration and
the reduction in judicial pay must be taken by an independent body.
28. If it were otherwise, one of the essential features of a constitutional
democracy and the rule of law would be compromised. Many judges dealing
with asylum and immigration cases have encountered country of origin
information dealing with the position of judges in developing countries
where the independence of the judiciary is parlous and where such judges
have limited institutional independence.
29. A finding by a reputable international court or observations by an
international organisation that these fundamental guarantees of constitutional
independence had been - even unwittingly - compromised, were the
suggested wording for the amendment to be adopted, would have huge
reputational implications for Ireland and for confidence in our legal system.
That confidence is not only a bulwark of the Constitution’s freedoms which
we as citizens enjoy in a free society, but is an essential bedrock of
economic confidence on which our recovery from the ordeal to which the
State is at present subject is completely premised. P a g e | 12
30. This memorandum is not prepared in opposition to an amendment of the
Constitution so as to ensure that judges bear a fair share of the burden of pay
reductions, but rather proposes that, if this is to be achieved, the essence of
constitutional independence must be safeguarded by means of an independent
adjudication on what these reductions should be.

[MrsFlushdraw]

think this might be the next play against me.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002610896504

someone add them there, I was added a while ago, but friendship was removed again.

I just added them.

[Zuroph]

cheers. Might be paranoia, but these random "local" pages opening and being friends with everyone always looks suspect, the timing is odd, and the rivals were friends very very early. might get a few of us as friends on there and post my blurb on it to see what happens.

[tylerdurden94]

I love the girl +she seems awesome (and I hate that word!!)

She use to be so annoying as that chick in That 70's Show but you are right she does seem absolutely wicked, seen this online today and if she goes through with it fair dues to her

Last Thursday, Sgt. Scott Moore of the 3rd Battalion 2nd Marines in Musa Qala, Afghanistan, posted a video on youtube to ask Mila on a date. Specifically, to the Marine Corps Ball on November 18th in Greenville, North Carolina. Over the weekend, Fox talked to Mila and Justin Timberlake about their movie ‘Friends With Benefits’, and they asked her about Moores video. This was apparently the first she had heard of it. And then…

…the clearly flattered actress agreed.
“I’ll go, I’ll do it for you,” she said, turning to Timberlake. “Are you going to come?”
“They don’t want me! They want you,” Timberlake responded. “You need to do it for your country.”
Kunis nodded.
“I’ll do it,” she confirmed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0om2ApQPvqI

Wheres that gif of her lezzer kiss?

See RS got in with the good gif.

SPOILER

I worked with a girl who was her spit. She has no idea how stunning she is and looks amazing without makeup. She has the eyes, the lips and the figure.

Sounds awesome don't mind that Ghostface dude he is a creep

[Emmet]

Mike McLOCK it up already

[Solskjaer]

LOL kayroo, seriously ?

[6starpool]

Very very strange one... I had a sig on a well known bullitin board where I have 000's of posts.. another guy from our company had the same sig.. It was worded in a particular way by the guy who looks after our website for SEO purposes..

For some strange reason we lost our top position on google in the last few days. now the mystry unfolds. I find my sig on that bullitin board has been changed to remove the key words required .... and so has the sig of the other guy in our company...

who would do that and why? Competitor is the only thing I can think of?

maybe some of you with more experience in modding such forums might point me in the right direction...

On boards at least (and since you didn't name the forum I'm making no assumptions) the rule for signatures is that you can have a link or an image, but not both. Only admins on boards can change your signature (as on here as well), and they will never to my mind modify your signature, only remove it and replace with a link to the signature rules or leave it alone. If it was another board then I would have no idea what their procedures or rules are, but I know on boards it is a fairly well established set of rules.

If it was boards and you want to ask my opinion on how to proceed, PM me. If it was elsewhere, I wouldn't have much idea I'm afraid.

[RasTa]

Tour De France was a fucking disaster today.

They are all Aliens! I've managed to cycle 100k's in 5 days so am delighted with myself

[Emmet]

WP Evening Herald, WP.



Cian Healy was DJ'ing at Oxegen with his friend Gordon, who is most definitely not Gordan D'Arcy!

[RasTa]

Having seen many of them in action they are among the most humane, intelligent and diligent professionals one could ever hope to appear before.

You've obviously never seen Judge Patricia Ryan proceed over a court.

[Denny Crane]

I think that galway mayor has set a record for a political u-turn.

[Caf]

Latest lotto tickets, here:

http://www.irishpokerboards.com/forum/showthread.php?p=361950#post361950

and here:

http://www.irishpokerboards.com/forum/showthread.php?p=361948#post361948

[dannydiamond]

You've obviously never seen Judge Patricia Ryan proceed over a court.

District court judge Michael Patwell is nothing short of an animal.


I'm sure most of them are how Kayroos describes them to be though in fairness.

[tylerdurden94]

Seeing as we had some Kate Upton confusion yesterday here is some of her pics, I know zuutroy will like this



She is good at Twitter

SPOILER

[ArmaniJeans]

I think that galway mayor has set a record for a political u-turn.

"I voted No by mistake, and hope that it can be rectified in September."
WP love, WP. Fingers crossed that Norris will have given up or got his 4 councils by then eh?

Her name was Hildegard Naughton I think, should be running a 50000 acre estate somewhere surely.

[Kayroo]

You've obviously never seen Judge Patricia Ryan proceed over a court.

I have actually. I am mainly referring to High and Supreme Court judges who are entitled to decide on constitutional matters and matters involving validity of legislation which the Government are interested in the outcome of. The Circuit Court has no jurisdiction to hear those sorts of matters.

[tylerdurden94]

The Government, and in particular Minister Shatter, are seeking to bring in an amendment to the Constitution in order to allow them reduce the pay given to judges. While I personally believe this is an absolutely terrible idea the judges themselves, and in particular the judges of the Supreme and High Court, have taken the position that this amendment is inevitable but that the actual power to set judge's wages must be kept out of the hands of Government and given to an independent body.

Judges, as a rule, refuse to comment on matters of public controversy. However, on this particular occasion, they have released a memorandum which was given to the Government via Marie Whelan, the Attorney-General, as is the proper means for the judiciary to communicate with the Government of the day. In order to facilitate press requests this was also placed on the Courts website www.courts.ie but, after direct pressure from Minister Shatter, this will be removed tomorrow.

I urge everyone here to read a copy. A link is here and I have included the text in the spoiler below.

Over the next few months, as this issue is played out in the papers, there will be many things said about judges and their pay and what they do. I can tell you from my experience of them that they are conscientious individuals who take a pay cut quite often to be judges. The honour and dignity of the office, as well as an opportunity to be a servant to the judicial system, is the driving force for most if not all of them. Having seen many of them in action they are among the most humane, intelligent and diligent professionals one could ever hope to appear before. Please do not allow Minister Shatter to blind you with his personal agenda and rhetoric and remember that judicial independence from the Government is an absolutely vital component of a free society. The price for freedom is constant vigilance and in this instance it is my honest belief that allowing the Government the power to control judicial wages is an atrocity which we cannot allow to happen.

In a paper delivered to the Venice Commission on Judicial Independence, the Director General for the Department of Judicial Administration for Slovenia wrote the following:

SPOILER

Re: Proposed Referendum on Article 35.5 of
The Constitution
Memorandum on the Proposed Amendment
1. No one doubts for a moment the seriousness of the economic crisis
facing the country. The judiciary has not opposed the proposal for amendment of
Article 35, section 5 of the Constitution. The ultimate decision on would, of
course, be entirely a matter for Oireachtas and the People. The issue here is
not whether judges’ pay should be reduced, but rather how that reduction should be
achieved, while effecting the least interference with the principle of independence
of the Judiciary which that provision of the Constitution is designed to protect.
Historical context
2. If judicial pay is cut, this will be the first time that this has occurred in
the legal history of these islands since the Act of Settlement 1701.
3. Article 68 of the 1922 Constitution provided that the remuneration of
judges “may not be diminished during their continuance in office”. Writing
in 1932 in his seminal text, Professor Kohn observed that: P a g e | 2
“The independence of the judges has been further safeguarded by the
provisions of Article 68 of the Constitution that their remuneration
may not be diminished during their continuance in office.”
1
4. Article 35.5 of the Constitution provides that:-
“The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his
continuance in office.”
5. During the debate on the Constitution, Deputy Norton (then leader of the
Labour Party) observed with regard to Article 35.5:-
“I take it that [Article 35.5] is intended to establish the independence
of the judiciary which function through [the High Court and the Supreme
Court] and it is probably intended to demonstrate to the community as a
whole and to judges in particular that judges are not liable to have their
salaries reduced if for any reason they do things which incur the displeasure
of the [Government].”
2
The rationale for the present rule
6. Article 35.5 of our Constitution is designed to protect judicial independence
As one of the great US Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, put it in
The Federalist Papers, No. 79 at the time of the enactment of the US
Constitution:-
“Next to permanency in office, nothing can contribute more to the
independence of the judges than a fixed provision for their support. In the
************************************************** *********
1
Kohn, Constitution of the Irish Free State (London, 1932) at 328.
2
67 Dail Debates, June 1, 1937. P a g e | 3
general course of human nature, a power over a Man’s Subsistence
amounts to a power over his Will.”
7. This principle is internationally acknowledged and cherished today. The words
of Hamilton were quoted with approval by a majority of our Supreme Court
in O’Byrne v. Minister for Finance
3
in holding that Article 35.5 did not
exempt judges from the necessity to pay income tax:
“The purpose of the Article is to safeguard the independence of
judges. To require a judge to pay taxes on his income on the same
basis as other citizens and thus to contribute to the expenses of
Government cannot be said to be an attack on his independence.”
4
8. Article III of the US Constitution provides that judicial compensation “shall not
be diminished during their Continuation in Office”, words which clearly
inspired Article 68 of the 1922 Constitution and Article 35.5 of the
Constitution.
9. The European Charter on the Statute for Judges, adopted at Strasbourg, 8 - 10
July 1998 under the auspices of the Council of Europe provides at Article 6.1:
“Judges exercising judicial functions in a professional capacity are entitled
to remuneration, the level of which is fixed so as to shield them from
pressures aimed at influencing their decisions and more generally their
behaviour within their jurisdiction, thereby impairing their independence and
impartiality.”
************************************************** *********
3
[1959] I.R. 1 at 35, per Maguire C.J.
4
[1959] IR 1 at 38, per Maguire CJ. P a g e | 4
10. On 23
rd
November 2001, the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE)
adopted Opinion No 1, which included reference to Recommendation No. R (94)
12, which provided that judges’ remuneration should be guaranteed by law and
commensurate with the dignity of their profession and burden of responsibilities
and that that it was generally important (and especially so in relation to the new
democracies) to make specific legal provision guaranteeing judicial salaries against
reduction
11. The underlying issue of principle is more complex. Mere knowledge that
the Oireachtas has the power to legislate to reduce salaries may be perceived,
even if it is not so in fact, as having the potential either to pressurise judges on
the one hand or, alternatively, make them liable to view the other branches
of government with suspicion or even hostility. In the words of one of the
most internationally respected judges in recent times, the late Lord Bingham:-
“There is also, perhaps, another and subtler link between independence and
remuneration. In most societies, and subject to obvious exceptions, there is
some perceived relationship between what someone earns and the status or
prestige which he enjoys. Financial rewards are not, of course, everything,
but nor are they nothing. Unless, therefore, the rewards of judicial office
(with or without other benefits) are sufficient to attract the ablest candidates
to accept appointment, albeit with some financial sacrifice, the ranks of the
Judiciary must be filled by the second best, those who (under our system)
have failed to make it in private practice, and there would be an inevitable
lowering in the standing and reputation of the Judiciary and a sea change in
the relationship between advocate and judge.”
5
************************************************** *********
5
Judicial Independence (OUP, 2005) P a g e | 5
12. In O’Byrne v Minister for Finance
6
, Lavery J. observed that from a
consideration of the 1922 Constitution and the corresponding provisions of
Article 35 of the Constitution that:-
“The idea emerges – that the judicial power of the State should be vested in
judges set apart in many important ways from the life of the community and
denied important civil rights in order that they should be independent in the
exercise of their functions.”
7

13. A number of significant restrictions on a member of the Judiciary are
explicit in the Constitution: disqualification from membership of the Oireachtas,
and prohibition on the holding of any other officer of emolument: Article 35.3.
Some of the constraints on the judiciary are regarded as implicit in the concept of
independence, and observed by convention since the foundation of the State : the
fact that judges do not speak or engage on matters of public controversy; the
convention that judicial appointment is normally for full service until retirement,
and that, even on retirement, a retired judge should not pursue any vocation or
employment either public or private, which is inappropriate for a judge. Nor do
the judges organise collectively. All these are understood to be components of an
independent judiciary. In return, the Constitution provides for fixity of tenure, that
a judge cannot be removed save for stated misbehaviour and then by separate
resolutions of the Dáil and Seanad (Article 35.4.1), and by a guarantee that
remuneration will not be reduced (Article 35.5).
14. It is clear that these matters are themselves essential requirements of the
independence of the judiciary which is an essential component in the concept of
separation of powers. This is why the guarantee against reduction in salaries
************************************************** *********
6
[1959] IR 1.
7
[1959] IR 1 at 40. P a g e | 6
is deeply embedded not only in the Constitution, but one finds it throughout
the constitutions and fundamental laws throughout the common law world.
15. In Canada, The Provincial Judges Reference
8
held that the reduction in
pay of provincial court judges in order to help address a budget deficit was
unconstitutional, as being inconsistent with the guarantee of judicial
independence contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. A
majority of the Canadian Supreme Court held that independent compensation
commissions are required to enable salaries to be set free of political influence.
The Court pointed out that, if remuneration of provincial judges is to be raised,
lowered or kept the same, this may be done along with the remuneration of other
government employees or with the judges' alone. The continued independence of
judges, however, will be kept apparent in any of these circumstances if it involves
review by an "independent, effective, and objective" body, i.e., the salary
commissions. What is involved in such circumstances is that, because what is
being done is to the financial disadvantage of judges, it is important that the extent
of discretionary power of the government of the day be kept to a minimum.
16. Furthermore, judges of the High Court and Supreme Court are
effectively debarred by the Rules of the Bar Council from returning to legal
practice following resignation or retirement.
9
As Kennedy C.J. put it in
James O’Connor’s case, these principles:
“reflect a common understanding underlying these [judicial]
appointments, that, with security of tenure and fixed and adequate
************************************************** *********
8
[1997] 3 SCR 3.
9
Re Sir James O’Connor’s Application [1930] IR 631, Rule 5.21 of the Code of Conduct of the Bar
(2010) provides:-
“Judges of the Irish Courts, following retirement or resignation, who return to the Bar may not practice in a
court of equal or lesser jurisdiction than the court of which they were a judge.” P a g e | 7
remuneration and pension, the practice of the profession of the law is
abandoned for ever by the person appointed.”
10
16. If, however, the constitutional principle that there be no reduction in
judicial remuneration is altered, then the basis for the permanent abandonment
by a judge of the practice of his profession is undermined. The proposition that it
is undesirable that a judge to return to practice was explained by Kennedy
C.J.:-
“There is good and powerful reason in support of such a rule, for it is
beyond doubt that if a man should step down from the privileged
position of the Bench and throw off what is a sacred office to engage
in the rough-and-tumble of litigious contest, and compete with
practitioners for the feed business of the Court, perhaps challenge the
decisions which he pronounced, or even fail to support them in
argument, he will shake the authority of the judicial limb of
government and mar the prestige and dignity of the Courts of Justice
upon which the whole structure of the State must always lean.”
11
17. There is here a question of perception and fairness. If, for example, a
High Court or Supreme Court judge returned to practice and appeared
before the High Court, then either the opposing counsel (and, more
importantly, their clients) might feel that they were at an unfair
disadvantage. But no one would be prepared to give up the right to practice
a profession permanently if they did not have the assurance of fixity of
salary and tenure of office.
************************************************** *********
10
[1930] IR 623 at 630.
11
[1930] IR 623 at 631. P a g e | 8
18. The same is true with respect to Article 35.3. Thus, for example, a
member of the Oireachtas (with whom, as we shall see, judges may be
expressly compared under the terms of the suggested wording at present available)
who is unhappy with reduction in his or her salary can, for instance,
supplement that by holding an office or position of emolument. There are
numerous instances where Oireachtas members quite properly derive income as
academics, lawyers, doctors, architects, teachers, company directors and so
forth.
19. Why, then, should this rule be maintained in such circumstances if the
quid pro quo - no reduction in pay - is being abandoned? Many continental
judges (including, for example, judges of the Court of Justice and the
German Constitutional Court) hold offices of emolument for example as
Professors in universities. Other continental judges engage in part-time
arbitration and mediation work.
20. Yet in a small jurisdiction such as ours, any relaxation of this rule
might have unfortunate consequences. Could, for example, a judge who
engaged in part-time arbitration work continue to hear arbitration cases in
his or her judicial capacity?
Fundamental flaws associated with the existing suggested wording
21. According to press reports, the approach to the amendment seems to be
grounded on the following wording, attributed to the Department of Justice:-
“The remuneration of judges shall not be reduced during their continuance in
office save as may be regulated by law on the basis of reductions that are
made by law, in the public interest, in the remuneration of persons generally P a g e | 9
or a class of such persons in the public service, including the Oireachtas and
other office holders.”
22. It is fundamental that in any proposed amendment, which seeks to protect
the independence of the judiciary, wide discretion is not left to the government of
the day (and, by extension, the Oireachtas of the day which would be
empowered to enact the appropriate legislation giving effect to the pay
reductions) as to the circumstances in which and extent to which reductions in pay
are implemented. Otherwise, there is a risk of perception that the judiciary may be
influenced by the government.
23. The suggested draft wording invites a number of comments. First, the
language is extremely loose. It would provide no limitation on the circumstances
in which a reduction should be made; the government’s view of the “public
interest” (as reflected in the legislation enacted by the Oireachtas) would
suffice. There is no method of calculating the reduction identified. The only
figure by reference to which such a reduction should be effected is contained in a
phrase of very broad potential application, namely, “in the public interest”. But
perhaps most significantly, the bodies which are to be charged with deciding the
reduction, both as to whether it is required and by reference to what comparator
such reduction should be calculated, are the other branches of government, i.e., the
Executive and Legislative branches. At a minimum it might be thought that any P a g e | 10
amendment should closely and specifically identify the circumstances in which any
deviation from the historic principles set out in Article 35.5 could be contemplated
such as a financial crisis involving the public finances accompanied by the
mechanism by which any salary reduction should be calculated, which should itself
be independent of government.
24. There would be furthermore nothing to stop the Oireachtas enacting
legislation cutting the pay of any other office holder(s) and applying that
particular pay cut to the judiciary. There is nothing in the suggested wording
of the proposed amendment to prevent a series of “tactical” cuts being
applied to different classes of public servants, but each of whom can be
applied to the judiciary.
25. The proposed wording would also provide less safeguards than that
previously proposed during the last Dáil in the 29
th
Amendment of the
Constitution Bill, 2009:-
“The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in
office, save where it is necessary to address a serious threat to the State’s
economy, there is a compelling need to stabilise the State’s finances and as a
consequence it is necessary to effect a reduction in public service
remuneration. In such circumstances, any reduction in the remuneration of
all public servants or in the remuneration of a class of public servants may
be applied to effect a comparable reduction in the remuneration of all
members of the judiciary.” P a g e | 11
26. Even then, however, that Bill would have been open to the fundamental
objection that it did not provide for an in-built mechanism for an
independent review of the levels of the reduction of judicial pay.
Conclusions
27. In our view, the suggested wording as published in the press is
fundamentally deficient and would compromise the substance of judicial
independence in the manner indicated. The principles of judicial
independence require that any decision regarding judicial remuneration and
the reduction in judicial pay must be taken by an independent body.
28. If it were otherwise, one of the essential features of a constitutional
democracy and the rule of law would be compromised. Many judges dealing
with asylum and immigration cases have encountered country of origin
information dealing with the position of judges in developing countries
where the independence of the judiciary is parlous and where such judges
have limited institutional independence.
29. A finding by a reputable international court or observations by an
international organisation that these fundamental guarantees of constitutional
independence had been - even unwittingly - compromised, were the
suggested wording for the amendment to be adopted, would have huge
reputational implications for Ireland and for confidence in our legal system.
That confidence is not only a bulwark of the Constitution’s freedoms which
we as citizens enjoy in a free society, but is an essential bedrock of
economic confidence on which our recovery from the ordeal to which the
State is at present subject is completely premised. P a g e | 12
30. This memorandum is not prepared in opposition to an amendment of the
Constitution so as to ensure that judges bear a fair share of the burden of pay
reductions, but rather proposes that, if this is to be achieved, the essence of
constitutional independence must be safeguarded by means of an independent
adjudication on what these reductions should be.

Cliffs on all of this what are you trying to say?

[Guest]

Hot damn!