• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Drugs Mules or innocent ?"

Collapse

  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by MarillionFan View Post
    These guys have reduced everything down to the lowest level. Fooking stupid.
    Assembly language?

    xor eax,eax

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Process California. Project designed by people away from the process.

    So three continents or 9000 miles....

    Leave a comment:


  • MarillionFan
    replied
    Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
    FFS, when did a report need a 'story'?
    These guys have reduced everything down to the lowest level. Fooking stupid.

    I'm testing the fields on all the new forms to see if you can generate an order form and what processes are needed to make sure we have mandatory fields.

    We have a new IT VP who's started. The last one implemented this process and it's not working. I'm now trying to work out how far out we are on this project versus their process.

    Leave a comment:


  • mudskipper
    replied
    Originally posted by MarillionFan View Post
    I could do with some drugs right now. Developing an order form for the business. When saying developing, I mean I'm following the instructions the developers have interpreted from the business requirements to see if they have enough instructions in my good old favourite Crystal Reports.

    They couldn't program tulip from what they've entered into their stories.
    FFS, when did a report need a 'story'?

    Leave a comment:


  • MarillionFan
    replied
    I could do with some drugs right now. Developing an order form for the business. When saying developing, I mean I'm following the instructions the developers have interpreted from the business requirements to see if they have enough instructions in my good old favourite Crystal Reports.

    They couldn't program tulip from what they've entered into their stories.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarillionFan
    replied
    Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
    That is brilliant - the kid on the right has got the expression to a T.
    WSS

    Dead ringers.

    Leave a comment:


  • mudskipper
    replied
    That is brilliant - the kid on the right has got the expression to a T.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post



    There is so much wrong with this, that I just dont know where to start.

    As soon as I have stopped laughing, I might start.



    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • mudskipper
    replied
    Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post
    Can you never manage a short, snappy post?
    Dominic Connor is Gentile?

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    Journalists are paid by the word. You should see what my uncle used to write in a day.
    He reminds me of John Major. The git used to infuriate me

    The quick not un-brown fox failed to not jump over the slow lazy dog


    grrr



    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post
    Can you never manage a short, snappy post?
    Journalists are paid by the word. You should see what my uncle used to write in a day.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaryPoppins
    replied
    Originally posted by Dominic Connor View Post
    There's few hard facts and narco police aren't exactly known for their respect for the truth, but my call is that they started off nearly innocent as users who found they could self finance then got a bit greedier and found that the ways out weren't attractive.

    To me the telling fact is the size of the haul.

    They were being trusted with a decent sized asset, 1.5 million worth according to the (almost nearly trustworthy) narco police.

    If you're doing a transaction of that, you want people handling it who won't hand it over to the police and even if you've issued industry standard threats there is the issue that a lot of 20 year olds when threatened with horrible death and forced to operate in countries they don't know well, where the penalties for getting caught aren't nice, many would simply fall apart, losing your goods and quite possibly leading the authorities back to you.

    That means you wouldn't just throw them in at the deep end, you'd try them out on smaller deals.

    But guilt or innocence is simply irrelevant in this case.
    Its a political decision mediated by a Peruvian judicial process that is by design absurdly slow in order to maximise the extraction of bribes. The UK government has little leverage over Peru and only pays lip service to making sure they have a fair trial unless there's the clearest possible evidence that they've been fitted up.
    At least they're white and vaguely attractive which means the UK press will care a bit every so often.
    Their MP (of whatever party) will get a jolly to Peru to "check that they're being treated properly" and utter carefully crafted vacuous statements that means when they're finally judged they get some credit if they are released but no tulip if they're found guilty.
    Then 5 years from now, they will have some "illness" and be released on humanitarian grounds so that the Peruvian government gets to look both tough on drugs but also humane. This will coincide with a big British firm getting a large contract in Peru to meddle with their water supply.
    Can you never manage a short, snappy post?

    Leave a comment:


  • doodab
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    I doubt its even £50,000. The more I read about it the more I'm sure the story I posted is true.
    I'm not convinced. The Peruvian authorities seize 20-30 tons of coke a year. This has made the papers here because it's two British girls, it probably didn't even make the 6 o clock news in Peru.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X