Quote:
Originally Posted by Boeing Guy
We live in a world where over 780 million people do not have access to clean drinking water.
Yet here we have a 'person' or what ever he /she/it wants to be? Claiming that united utilities do not provide water that is to his* exacting standards, what ever they are. We are not privy to these, after all they are more than likely rubbish.
Yet this person* is more than happy to carry on receiving this and also having any waste water removed and treated. Furthermore he* is taking the high ground in claiming he* is in the right. Despite the water companies having to provide water to exacting standards as laid out by the WHO, this person* knows better.
Then there is the issue of TV licence, do I want one, no, but I pay it.
I could list many reasons why and in the light of recent scandals at the BBC one wonders, but it ones own to this, I want to live in this society we have in the UK and as such I pay my way.
This person* obviously knows better than the rest of us or is a complete.....well I would rather not say.
*please refer to the second sentence, as he* is not a person he*. Must not be of this earth
Just to say, this is the Oxford Dictionary definition of Person
Definition of person
noun (plural people or persons)
human being regarded as an individual
Obviously he* is not human
|
you are entitled to your views,believes as am I.
There may well be 780 million people that do not have access to clean drinking water but do they also have a service forced on them?
Here is a abstract from my letter to United Utilities
I would be happy to discuss settlement of any financial obligation I might owe, as soon as I receive the following documentation from you:
1. Validation of the ‘bill’ (the actual accounting including costs per dwelling of adding chemicals and/or medication to my water supply);
2.. Unequivocal evidence that United Utilities Group PLC are not medicating myself and my family members by adding chemical additives to the water supply
3.Unequivocal evidence that the fluoride added to the water supply by United Utilities Group PLC is not a bi-product of the agro-chemical industry and therefore deemed as industrial waste
4.Unequivocal evidence that there are any benefits to humans resulting from the consumption of fluoride in the water supply;
5.Unequivocal evidence that there are no harmful side effects from other chemicals (including chlorine) added to the water supply by United Utilities Group PLC
It is my view that every human being has a right to a clean, safe and health promoting water supply and that United Utilities Group PLC are in breach of this human right and therefore in breach of their duty of care.
As for tv licence you carry on paying it and i'll carry on laughing
As for the 'PERSON' issue try a legal dictionary...they don't use english in court