t3doo

sorry for butting in gangster, the truth is that people can take the ets rings off the birds and they can have them registered on their own birds by their secretary, only thing is they can be caught out and if it is found that their secretary knowingly registered the stolen rings then they should be banned from racing pigeons along with the theif and no messing about. cheers.

sorry for butting in gangster, the truth is that people can take the ets rings off the birds and they can have them registered on their own birds by their secretary, only thing is they can be caught out and if it is found that their secretary knowingly registered the stolen rings then they should be banned from racing pigeons along with the theif and no messing about. cheers.

tammy, i dont think the benzing is passed as benzing could not guarantee the security of the clock, i have also heard that there could be a problem with the tipes not being able to strike against the master timer, perhaps someone could respond and clarify if this is true, i beleive the unikon champ has just been passed for use by the shu at recent rules meeting and passed by council at march meeting. lastly i think it should be the responsibility of the various ets suppliers to make sure their systems conform to the rules of the relevant organisations the buyers belong to and if they dont then the buyers should be entitled to a full refund on the basis that the goods are not suitable for the purpose they were purchased, just my opinion not sure about legal requirements. cheers. ps. if you contact shu they will furnish you with current up to date list of passed ets systems. cheers.

well put bruno,. after all how many times do you see it on the telly politicians at the ballot boxes voting for themselfs. cheers.

not quite bart after all john barlow stayed with the shu, and stayed to fight his corner so to speak, and the thing is as someone on the forum said it was going to be a dirty fight at the march meeting, how right they were, as i said before my sympathy to john barlow i only hope he can work with the schemers and lets get on with racing the doos and give the politics a rest. cheers

i think he acted in the interest of the shu unlike the pair of vice presidents, i never thought that ian noble and scott gibson would form an alliance to oust john barlow it was my belief that they had no respect for each other, but it would appear that desperate men do deserate things, ian noble has come down in my estimation i really thought more of him, as for scott gibson i think he is an egomaniac who craves attention, i had never heard of the man three years ago, now i am sick hearing about him after all how many commitees can one man be on, surely this is not the solution for the shu. my sympathy goes out to john barlow having to work with the schemers. cheers.

i think he acted in the interest of the shu unlike the pair of vice presidents, i never thought that ian noble and scott gibson would form an alliance to oust john barlow it was my belief that they had no respect for each other, but it would appear that desperate men do deserate things, ian noble has come down in my estimation i really thought more of him, as for scott gibson i think he is an egomaniac who craves attention, i had never heard of the man three years ago, now i am sick hearing about him after all how many commitees can one man be on, surely this is not the solution for the shu. my sympathy goes out to john barlow having to work with the schemers. cheers.

fifer, frank has not got a delegate because he is not a member of the shu he is only stirring the s--t.

whats it got to do with you anyway frank, why dont you stick your knebb in to your own organisation after all you are no longer a member of the shu, i dont see any shu members coming on this forum slagging the rpra, at least the shu dont allow suspended members to participate if they are suspended by any other organisation, anyway what are you asking bart for after all it was you who was the ex delegate for central fed, you would think a past delegate for the shu would at least be familiar with the rules but there again you were not there to benifit the shu you were one of the disidents, keep on walking frank your pals never won.

i dont think it would be appropriate for shu delegates to respond to all the allegations made on this forum especially when most of the people on here making the allegations are not even shu members. eg. frankdooman, johno(tenyears) etc. etc. cheers bruno.

first of all lets try to clarify something, who really wants all the walkers back the shu has been managing fine without them, could it be that now the rpra has passed the ets they are walking back, well i think they should keep on walking and i am sure most of the shu members would agree. secondly could you please tell me bart what scott gibson would bring to the presidensy of the shu, i really dont know where you or scott think that he has anything to offer the shu, it certainly is not his knowledge of the rules he may get away with babbling a load of crap at the snfc meetings, i have witnessed that but there a lot smarter delegates sitting on the shu council and i really hope he does not succeed. cheers.

to try and help out here bruno, I think the main theme of this thread was to discredit the members of the SHU council and in particular the president john barlow. ( by the way none of them could hold a candle to the man.) (1) to take the east of scotland fed for example they lost a club through natural circumstances and to keep their fed status one club split to form two clubs, no new delegates they still have the same one. (2)west of scotland has been a federation since glasgow fed went to the RPRA and left them high and dry, if greengrass is to be beleived then john barlow must have predicted that lanarkshire fed along with most of the other feds in both scotland and england were going to have a bad race that particular weekend and that he would get the blame, so he set up this fed to keep him on the council, perhaps john barlow is clarevoyant or perhaps greengrass is talking the usual crap, you make up your own mind!!! cheers.

dont think its the answer you are looking for but the answer is YES. cheers.

fifer I have read the rules and constitution of the SHU and I can not find anywhere that states you need 20 members to form a federation, it does say you require a minimum of 5 members to form a society or club and it also states you require a minimum of 4 societies or clubs to form a federation nowhere does it state that you require 20 members to form a federation, would suggest you check part 2 of the SHU constitution, cheers.

YOU FRANK ARE NOT A MEMBER OF THE SHU AND THE SCOTTISH NATIONAL BY CHOICE, DONT START RUBBISHING THE SNFC ( THE TRUE SCOTTISH NATIONAL ) YOU MAY END UP HAVING TO FLIT TO RACE DOOS, AFTER ALL SCOTLAND IS A NATION IS IT NOT, WE MAY BE BRITISH BUT WE ARE STILL SCOTTISH AND PROUD OF IT, KEEP ON WALKING FRANK YOU MIGHT END UP OVER THE BORDER AND GIE US AW PEACE, CHEERS.