Agree with Ron. Many a nasty little wanker has got by on the idea that he or she is a rebel and people's hero.
I see him and his band of silly feckers as a sort of voyeur. They enjoy looking under the skirts of things and then running off in hysterics when they are called to book.
I don't know what one does with people like that. Prison will possibly do more harm than good. They need reorienting. They need to have the lacks filled that were to blight their development because most of them are either from manless families or they have been set upon and sucked dry by cunning manipulators who urge them to do the bad stuff, then sit back in their anonymity and watch the houses of cards fall. They intend to slide in and take up residence when the "fascists" have departed. If you think you were against the incumbents wait till you are governed by the glorious rebels of the windmill and sailing ship brigade.
That is seriously weird. So weird that I'm done with you. Actually, having read the post again, it's hysterically weird; I mean 'wait till you are governed by the glorious rebels of the windmill and sailing ship brigade.' WTF's that supposed to mean? Don't answer, because you obviously have some kind of agenda. Anyway have a good life - shame people like you would deny someone else his. Over and out.
When he's dead the truth will come out it did about Saville and the other miscreants, people will even say he looked the type then.
It won't come out - the born-to-rule elitists will bury it.
He's a clot. You can't prosecute him for that but that is basically what he is.
Out of curiosity, why do you think he's a clot? All he's done is to expose the incompetence and corruption of those who presume to govern us, and to condemn someone for doing that, and taking on the power of the elitist Establishment, seems totally bizarre.
Well I shan't be watching it. Totally pointless as it would be trying to work out who the bigger liar is.
I watched the first 15 minutes, but typical ITV they dumbed in down; the audience clapping for both sides was using up more time than what was being said in the actual debate.
When have the EU ever passed up the opportunity to obtain more money from the UK? Months ago, (if you look back on the threads) I said they would use this as an excuse to 'fine' the UK!
I've often thought, because of our neurotic need to be the goody-two-shoes of the world, that as we're one of the net contributors, we're the only fools who pay the full whack without question, and the others fall well short? Who would ever know, especially when the EU budgets haven't been signed off for a decade or so? It would explain why the charlatans are so fearful of our leaving? It would also explain the last 12 years of infrastructure austerity; the potholes in my local residential road are almost as big as sink-holes; every now and again the council will plonk a few spadefuls of tarmac in some of them, and within a week or two they're just as bad again.
I wonder if the French ever got around to paying the fine which the EU imposed on them for the delay in accepting our beef, after science had proved the problem was now over? My guess? No, the French told the EU to 'Get stuffed, and what are you going to do about it?' How they all must have been laughing at us over the years - 'Those stupid rosbeefs are the suckers but we need them - or at least, we need their money.'
What a fiasco. Another annus horribilis coming up.
There seems to be one every year. To have one annus horribilis may be regarded as a misfortune, but to have them year after year seems like dysfunctionality to me.
What's the fucking point of nominating a UK MEP when we won't be in the EU? It just goes to show how dumb these Johnny Foreigners are that they don't understand that?
Cynic maybe, shameless, no.
By the way, why are they all discussing Andrew's sweating? What does that have to do with anything?
I don't know, I've been wondering the same thing, Maybe we missed a nuance somewhere along the way?
They are all scum. That is obvious. However, what is the charge against Andrew? That he is a really crap royal role model? So was his Aunty Margaret. So what.
There is almost certainly a whole raft of obligatory favours under the mat, but that still doesn't make Andrew culpable of any offence. Sleeping with a very experienced 17 year old Epstein recruit won't cut that mustard.
Why is this whole thing being blown out of proportion?
Ah, Brexit swerve.
You shameless cynic!
So Corbyn and Johnson will go head to head on ITV tonight; that'll be interesting to watch them spinning away like mad with all their 'jam tomorrow' drivel and doublespeak? The latest was the Tories are gonna plant 60 zillion trees by 2035, and Swinson countered it with 'the Lib Dems are going to plant twice as many'. What utter contempt they must have for the electorate in their expectation that we'll believe it? So we'll have one who couldn't run a fucking whelk-stall, and another who's a fucking adroit liar, and one of them is going to be our next prime minister. I've never known anything like this!
Repeating this here in the correct forum, and deleting the original which somehow I posted on the incorrect one. Silly me!
What about some of the names of Dickens' characters? I'm currently reading (yet again) The Life and Adventures of Martin Chuzzlewit, and Mrs Gamp's landlord is one 'Pol Sweedlepipe'. She always refers to him as Mr Sweedlepipes (with an 's'). I've never read a book which has made me laugh out loud so many times. What a genius he was.
I was even laughing while I was typing that!
I know a chap who is long serving crew on Hastings Lifeboat.. we spent hours over a few beers with him telling me all about his risky trips (understating it) I listened with 100% keenness.
But, I will not donate to the RNLI while the CE gets all that money.
As for immigrants... I want total border control. Its not easy but thats what I want.
I speak as an immigrant.
Australians - New Zealanders - Canadians and more.. function under the Union Flag and Queen Elizabeth - yet they can NOT simply sail into the UK and stay legally.
No, it wouldn't apply to them because the whole idea is to dilute and then destroy western cultures, and they don't fit the bill.
That old saying ... when you are deep in a hole, stop digging.
Truth will always show its front. He, Andrew, is clearly a liar. This attitude doubles up on failing support he might have induced. I dont care who it is.. liars should be shown for what they are and if they live off my hard earned tax.. I have the right to dig them out and I always will. Especially when - if you or I did the same we would be proper shafted.
Yep, it's still a case of 'one law for them, and another one for us', and it always will be.
Deleted post. Wrong forum.
The tabloids are still full of it so trying to draw a line with that car crash interview has failed. Indeed it has raised more questions than it has answered.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive? I didn't coin that, by the way!
Looks like Swindlecon and Kranky ( Sounds like a dodgy law firm ) lost their court case to try and but into the main debate on TV.
Private Eye always used lawyers called Sue Grabbit, and Runne.
The media is keeping this alive by constant reports on the plight of illegals with a suitably sad looking female UK journalist in the bows of a migrant ship or out in some windblown desert among desperate tent dwellers and articles of what a terrible time migrants are having getting to the UK. (Just when you might be thinking that stopping people trafficking by those making money out of it was a solution to this misery.)
I presume these articles are intended to make anyone thinking "Hang on a minute" immediately go quiet and feel contrite.
It's just another part of the insanity which has stricken the western world.
Americans also say "aloominum" and"labbatorry" but that hasn't stopped them doing amazing things scientifically and otherwise. Americans were not all English and their differing pronunciations come from that heritage and distance from the original. They have done to football and cricket what they have done to language, but in doing so, they simply made these adaptations their own.
What annoys me is the British sycophantic narrators on programs where they use the American pronunciations. They are happy to relinquish the proper pronunciation in the same way they seem willing to bin much of our heritage in some inexplicable need to please Uncle Sam's political correctness brigade. What is wrong with these people? How cheaply are they willing to sell themselves, and by extension, all of you, to please the masters of diversity by ironically extinguishing what is different?
It's their 'anaesthesiologists' (7 syllables) instead of 'anaesthetists' (4 syllables) that I always find a bit strange.
I am happy the CE of the RNLI is earning his £190,000 annual wage.
. . . and whilst those who are out there risking their lives to save other lives in stormy seas (the real purpose of lifeboats) are paid peanuts, our CE is slowly turning around and around in his leather chair wondering how he can spend all his money. Ah well, that's 'bureaucracy' for you.
"I don't think there should be any accusations of paedophilia (I'm talking about Andrew here, not Epstein) - I don't know what he got up to) because there has been no child involvement: the main case is abuse of fame/celebrity to procure sex with young females, at at 17 years of age, this woman also knew what she was doing".
Epstein is a convicted pedophile. All my comments have inferred or directly linked Andrews choice of "best mate" is a pedophile. That is fair comment.
It is beyond doubt that Epstein "trafficked" young girls. Trafficking is a serious criminal offence. It is beyond doubt his Royal parasite was involved with girls who were "trafficked" to Epsteins island /home.
It is obvious that Epstein had stuff on the son of our Monarch from which he could and probably did blackmail him. This is why Epstein was arrested, in order to get him in a prison cell and knock him off. Which is exactly what happened.
Don't get me wrong, mali: he should be hauled before a court to 'give his side of the story', by which I mean account for the cynical exploitation of his celebrity status in order to procure impressional young females, and it could even be argued he's entitled to prove his innocence - if he wants to? Obviously, if he doesn't want to, then that decision in and of itself, would speak volumes? My point was that there's a wide margin between exploiting children (say upto age 12 years?), and young women, many of whom are only too willing to become involved for the (as I've said) celebrity thing, which they can wear as some kind of badge of achievement.
As to your last sentence - I've always thought exactly the same as you, and all of this is beginning to look like we were right, because it patently hasn't worked?
Hastings lifeboat assists as migrant vessel is brought to shore in Dungeness
I don't know why the government doesn't simply set up a ferry service between Calais and the south coast, then a) the French government won't need to supply any more dinghies for the illegals, b) they wouldn't have to risk their lives in the busiest stretch of shipping waterway in the world, and c) the Royal Navy could re-deploy the Channel cutters to more worthwhile uses, and save the taxpayers a fortune in fuel costs t'boot. 'Those whom the gods wish to destroy . . .'!
In one of the 'So what you mean is . . .?' interviews I watched on Youtube recently, the interviewee was one of those people who seem not able to say the word 'nuclear', but say 'newculer'; he said it about 20 times in a half-hour interview. For one thing nuclear is such an easy word to say. and secondly I always wonder how they would spell it if the word came up in a written context? I blame George Dubbya Bush - he used to say newculer too.
Her Majesty's new annus horribilis: Andrew's disgrace, Philip's car crash, and Harry and Meghan's jetsetting... royal biographer A. N. WILSON writes that for first time in generations, the Queen lacks a wise adviser – and the price may be ruinous......
all this for 60 pence a year... only O'leary could top this.
I don't think it will be ruinous because of the irrational and mindless public adoration of the individual members of the monarchy, and that's something I'll never understand. The reason that I believe it won't be ruinous is because even over so many years of blatant paedophilia within 'the church', they still have their congregations? As they say - There's nowt s'queer as folk?
I'm in the kitchen. You are standing outside with your nose pressed up against the window. I didn't threaten you. I merely expressed my opinion on trolls.
You suggested the British regents support debauchery and that they support it in their son. I cautioned you to be careful what you casually threw around publicly as those are extremely libelous suggestions. Apart from the fact that they are wholly fictional.
Andrew so far hasn't had sex with an under aged girl, hasn't fiddled any kids or trafficked any women and there is no evidence to support any mad accusations on the part of lawyers and the media that Prince Andrew has "no compassion" for abused young girls. The whole thing is a disgusting farce. And it's deflecting attention from the real culprit who is conveniently dead.
Stop pretending to be hurt. I know this ploy. I won't work with me. As far as I am concerned this subject is closed. They must obtain proof that Andrew knew this girl and was involved in "forcing" her to sleep with him. If they cannot and if they cannot explain that strange photo that looks altered, then perhaps they should stop badgering him when the real culprit is Epstein and he is dead.
I don't think there's any doubt that he knew her otherwise she wouldn't have allowed him to put his arm around her waist, and more importantly, be so relaxed about such intimacy, so he knew her alright. But the crux is that nobody will ever know the truth, because with wealth, social power and celebrity comes influence, and that means there are those who are willing to lie for personal favours or monetary enrichment, whichever they choose. And it's pointless that anybody should defend him unless they can prove they witnessed the offence, so apart from cctv evidence, that too is impossible. Therefore Buckingham Palace's rebuttals and his mother's denials are meaningless and irrelevant. In short, although nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors, very often demeanor and body language can strongly suggest that something did go on? Additionally there's no point whatever in the FBI interviewing him, because like the claims of Russian interference into the presidential election, they'll never be able to prove it, and it will just be a waste of everybody's time.
I don't think there should be any accusations of paedophilia (I'm talking about Andrew here, not Epstein - I don't know what he got up to) because there has been no child involvement: the main case is abuse of fame/celebrity to procure sex with young females, and at 17 years of age, this woman also knew what she was doing.
Bryanluc does make some worthy comments. Certainly no worse than mine. I 100% respect free speech and all opinions are biased or they would not be opinions.
I do not accept nor understand why some people, on forums, turn from the subject matter to the person.
Example: I support border control. A decent reply is to debate the subject... Border control or not? But some people reply thus..: "thats because you are a racist, xenophobe"... there is never any reason to be personal towards someone you do not know.
The only time I ever get personal is in response to personal insult directed at me.
I was called a "NAZI" just because i want border control. For me that is an insult and in fact defamatory. But I dont mind I simply replied by calling that person a "pedophile"!! He went ballistic and literally reported me to the police. He printed out all the discussion and took the pages to a police station.
This leftie liberal thought it OK to call me a NAZI but not OK for me to reply in like-minded way. This is nuts.
The Left with it's simplistic rationalising is the unwitting enemy of all nation states. It's what Pinochet was up against in Chile; he knew the hard Left had to be stopped before they destroyed the country. Like I said in a post a couple of minute ago - extremism begets extremism - it's a fact of life.
I hope you are right but we are already seeing the rise of the hard right and Nazi party in Germany as the EU is starting to fragment
Not so. We're seeing the rise of 'the right', and it's scarcely surprising as we look on (especially in Sweden) at the now-evident catastrophically disastrous consequences of the hard Left's dogma. 'Refugees are welcome here'? Extremism begets extremism. and that's what we're seeing.