User talk:Faedra

PLACE YOUR COMMENTS HERE:

Please note: Useful and constructive comments from other users are recorded on this page. All comments are ultimately deleted, to make room for the latest items, ths offensive comments are removed immediately, (havnt had any yet) all data can be found via 'history' tab.

Thank you for taking the time to bother at all!...

Special thanks to: (order of contact)

01 Thue 
02 Burgundavia 
03 Deb 
04 Finlay McWalter 
05 Charles Matthews 
06 Acegikmo1

for valued advice and assistance.

REF: useful Wikipedia pages:

Ref: Personal profile of contributor Faedra

No such file from Fester.

latest...

My reversion

MrWeeble 22:00, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I just reverted your last edit of Thames Gateway and I feel that it is only fair that I explain my reasoning more fully. While I understand your feelings against this project, to use the phrasing that you did is not really appropriate in an encyclopaedia as it states your point of view too much.

reply: (Faedra 11:28, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)) It is not an opinion that the present government has failed to locate weopons of mass destruction in Iraq, it is a fact. This comparison is relivent because the overwhealming evidence presented by the consultation process against an Airport at Cliffe also shows the government to be in error of judgement. The relitivity between the two illustrates the fact that government policy is flawed, and this must have a baring on the multi million pound investment scheme proposed for North Kent...

If looked objectively at the question of WMDs in iraq, it is not related to this issue in any way except that you disagree with the decision made by the government in both counts.

This is not so, I was supportive of the policy of liberating Iraq from Saddam, but misled by the British government by their flawed reasoning. I do not wish to see such deception ruin North Kent.

Likewise the bit about "a total disregard for public opinion" implies that all public opinion is against it - it isn't.

Such members of the public would do well to stay at home.

Sorry for having to revert, your contributions to the page (may) have been invaluable, but I could see no way of NPOVing it.

MrWeeble 22:00, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I do not dispute the fact that the government has not found wmds, I disputed the relevence to the current issue. The governement did not state anything as fact only to be disproved after the event. In this case the govenment consulted (ie asked opinions) and then, upon hearing the opinions decided against that possisble course of action. Policy was not to build an airpoirt, but to investigate the possibility which they did successfully. Regarding your comment about "Such members of the public would do well to stay at home" I am afraid I don't quite understand what you mean? I am such a person; My home is in the Thames Gateway area; the area I live in has seen a number of benefits associated with the scheme. What do you mean that I should "stay at home"?