|
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 30, 11:37*am, 1506 wrote:
On Aug 29, 8:22*pm, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote: On Aug 29, 8:09*pm, wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 01:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Tom wrote: limits. *There's a graph around the net of the Tory share of the vote since the war and it's clearly declining, which possible explains why Really? Hmm, thats odd: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/el...ml/england.stm Looks pretty blue to me in england. (sic) That's because the Tories tend to do well in the affluent countryside constituencies that cover the largest geographical areas. Even in the event of a Labour landslide, those maps would still look pretty blue. The countryside: That would be farms. *Farmers are the folks who work long hours to put food on your table. *They are common sense people. They vote Conservative because they have worked very hard for what they have. *Do you have a problem with that? The Conservatives are currently putting hard-working people out of work just so that their friends don't have to pay more taxes. I certainly have a problem with that. If people want to support the Conservatives low-tax, low-spending attitudes, fine, but don't expect any sympathy from the state if they fall on hard times. And I'm afraid that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my understanding of Christianity. Nick |
1506 and Boltar
On 30/08/2011 20:51, Nick wrote:
The Conservatives are currently putting hard-working people out of work just so that their friends don't have to pay more taxes. Which could mean they are tackling persistent cable thieves so that their constituents don't have to pay for the damage they cause.... -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
1506 and Boltar
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:16:15 +0100, The Real Doctor
wrote: On 30/08/11 09:51, d wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:44:16 +0100 Charles wrote: Btw, if there was something about that pretty simple sentence you didn't understand just ask. Or are you practicing your latin? Possibly more than you seem to be practising your English. Fine. Point out the grammatical error then. That should have been "Point out the grammatical error, then" - you missed a comma. In your previous post it should have been "practising", not "practicing". He seems to have missed that he cocked up the usage of the English language while alleging another's inability to understand it. |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:52:03 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: Eastern europe barely produces enough for itself these days and if the whole of the EU suddenly sourced ALL its food from abroad , even assuming there was enough spare, what do you think that would do to global prices? Suddenly that lamb from argentina won't be available cheaper than local produce. Nobody mentioned the EU, just Tescos. I used Tescos as an example supermarket you numptie. I thought that was pretty obvious. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:23:10 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote: On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:16:15 +0100, The Real Doctor wrote: On 30/08/11 09:51, d wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:44:16 +0100 Charles wrote: Btw, if there was something about that pretty simple sentence you didn't understand just ask. Or are you practicing your latin? Possibly more than you seem to be practising your English. Fine. Point out the grammatical error then. That should have been "Point out the grammatical error, then" - you missed a comma. In your previous post it should have been "practising", not "practicing". He seems to have missed that he cocked up the usage of the English language while alleging another's inability to understand it. Its only people desperate to score a point no matter what who resort to commenting on typos. If there isn't some usenet law about that then there should be. It doesn't make you look clever - just rather petty and sad. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:33:31 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote: What happened 1000 years or even 50 years ago is irrelevant, I'm concerned about what's happening now. How far back does your "now" go ? Do you see Big Mistakes MkI and MkII as "irrelevant" ? Shall we start with 1997 when the worse thing to happen to this country in a generation got elected into power? B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 30, 2:49*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message ... [drivel snipped] Adrian, I know you're reading this, despite claiming to have killfiled me.. Now, there's a good troll, listen up. Apart from confirming Olbermann's dictum ("the right exists in a perpetual state of victimhood"), your rambling, delusional and paranoid rants are useless. They serve only to show that you are not all there, that you have difficulty getting a handle on reality, and that you should seek medical assistance at the earliest opportunity. Ultra right-wing, fundamentalist zealots like Mr "Auer"-Hudson are a dwindling minority, at least in this country. And I think they know it. That's why they are soooo ANGRY all the time. They hate the fact that they can no longer impose their bigoted views on the rest of us. The same applies to Bottlar, but he, like you, has difficulty taking this on board. Whatever. Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. One ought to feel sorry for him, really. |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote: Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. One ought to feel sorry for him, really. When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions: http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249 Or was that your best Frank Spencer face? B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:09:09 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: I used Tescos as an example of a _British_ supermarket you numptie, I thought that was pretty obvious. No, you didn't. Apparently your memory is failing as you get older so let me help: ---------------- From: d Message-ID: Because supermarkets won't pay them the real value of what they produce. The farmers should call their bluff - then watch Tesco et al panic as they try and source basic commodities for the entire country from abroad. ---------------- Also which bit of "et al" are you having trouble with? You can take your foot out of your mouth now to answer. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 10:13*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. *One ought to feel sorry for him, really. When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions: http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249 Or was that your best Frank Spencer face? Touche! In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. Anyway, I may *look* gormless - your postings continually establish that you *are* entirely without gorm. |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 2:13*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. *One ought to feel sorry for him, really. When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions: http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249 Or was that your best Frank Spencer face? Thank you Boltar. I had not seen that. He sort of reminds me of Mr. Bean, as does Ed Milliband. :-) |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 11:08*am, 1506 wrote:
On Aug 31, 2:13*am, wrote: On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. *One ought to feel sorry for him, really. When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions: http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249 Or was that your best Frank Spencer face? Thank you Boltar. *I had not seen that. *He sort of reminds me of Mr. Bean, as does Ed Milliband. sobs into a hankie at the two nasty men taking the **** |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 11:12*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. Not by me! I still do it, but given that it nearly killed me, I wouldn't exactly say it has been beneficial for my health. |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 11:15:39 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: Also which bit of "et al" are you having trouble with? Nothing at all, you were using Tesco as a generic British supermarket, so was I. If that is a difficult concept for you that is not my problem. I was talking about all of them as was quite bloody clear in my initial post which I just cut and pasted for you and it was this initial comment that I continued to refer to. So I suggest you put back those goalposts you moved to save face before you look a complete ****. Actually , it might be too late on that score. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 30, 9:56*am, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote:
On Aug 30, 11:37*am, 1506 wrote: On Aug 29, 8:22*pm, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote: That's because the Tories tend to do well in the affluent countryside constituencies that cover the largest geographical areas. Even in the event of a Labour landslide, those maps would still look pretty blue. The countryside: That would be farms. *Farmers are the folks who work long hours to put food on your table. *They are common sense people. They vote Conservative because they have worked very hard for what they have. Are you saying that the Labour Party's core voters - the working class - don't work hard? There's a clue in the name. My family have always been working class. We have always worked hard. My paternal Grandfather was a tin worker in South Wales. Few worked so hard for so little. OTOH had the workers of the UK all been doing their jobs to the best of their reasonable ability, for the past 60 years, the UK would still have a World Class Aircract Industry, a succesful Auto Industry, not to mention Steel, etc. etc. As to what causes people to vote Conservative, mainly it's the combination of being both well-off and selfish: "I'm all right, Jack". Then there are the xenophobes and bigots, if they haven't switched to voting UKIP or BNP. And some people are just plain clueless or too young to remember the Thatcher years. Some of us choose to vote Conservative, no one causes us to do so. We believe in personal responsibility, moral values, reward for hard work, stabiliy, individual rights & responsibilities, law & order, a strong country, etc., etc., etc. We are not all wealthy, nor think "I'm alright Jack". The Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney, years are fondly remembered by many. Do you have a problem with that? Nowhere in the post you replied to did I even suggest I had a problem with anything. You found country dwellers guilty of being wealthy, and voting Tory. As a teenager, I helped out on a farm in the County of Buckingham. I can asure you that the workers, and the farm manager, were far from wealthy. Nock the countryside if you wish. *You are biting the hand that feeds you. You are reading words that I did not write. I would never "nock" the countryside and neither would I knock it. I was brought up in the countryside, for flip sake. Thank you for the correction. See above for comments about "rural guilt". |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote: Not by me! I still do it, but given that it nearly killed me, I wouldn't exactly say it has been beneficial for my health. I'm sure someone in your line of work can afford a car to commute in. There's no way in hell I'd cycle along my route to work. I'd be dead in a week if I tried it on the north circular. I've never even seen the lycra condom squad trying their luck on that road. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 30, 12:51*pm, Nick wrote:
On Aug 30, 11:37*am, 1506 wrote: On Aug 29, 8:22*pm, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote: On Aug 29, 8:09*pm, wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 01:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Tom wrote: limits. *There's a graph around the net of the Tory share of the vote since the war and it's clearly declining, which possible explains why Really? Hmm, thats odd: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/el...ml/england.stm Looks pretty blue to me in england. (sic) That's because the Tories tend to do well in the affluent countryside constituencies that cover the largest geographical areas. Even in the event of a Labour landslide, those maps would still look pretty blue. The countryside: That would be farms. *Farmers are the folks who work long hours to put food on your table. *They are common sense people. They vote Conservative because they have worked very hard for what they have. *Do you have a problem with that? The Conservatives are currently putting hard-working people out of work just so that their friends don't have to pay more taxes. I certainly have a problem with that. If people want to support the Conservatives low-tax, low-spending attitudes, fine, but don't expect any sympathy from the state if they fall on hard times. And I'm afraid that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my understanding of Christianity. No poor man ever gave me a job. Taxing the job creators will not help turn the western economies around. Perhaps you could explain your understanding of Christianity, and how the UK Labour party have promulgated its values and enabled its progress. |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 11:32*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:16:58 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: Not by me! *I still do it, but given that it nearly killed me, I wouldn't exactly say it has been beneficial for my health. I'm sure someone in your line of work can afford a car to commute in. There's no way in hell I'd cycle along my route to work. I'd be dead in a week if I tried it on the north circular. I've never even seen the lycra condom squad trying their luck on that road. I don't use it as a form of transport, only as a hobby. Most roads leading into major cities are far too dangerous for the former, as you say. |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote: I don't use it as a form of transport, only as a hobby. Most roads The only time I've broken some bones was when I was launched over the handlebars of a bike when on holiday. I think a gym is a lot healthier. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 3:12*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. No one would wish that sort of accident on anyone. Had I known I would have shown some restraint. That said: Adversity has the effect of enlarging one's true character. After trauma folks tend to be more mellow, or angry, depending on their pre-existing disposition. Sadly W. has emerged as an angry man. |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 11:45*am, 1506 wrote:
On Aug 31, 3:12*am, wrote: On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. No one would wish that sort of accident on anyone. *Had I known I would have shown some restraint. Thanks. No offence taken. I'm pretty thick skinned. That said: Adversity has the effect of enlarging one's true character. *After trauma folks tend to be more mellow, or angry, depending on their pre-existing disposition. *Sadly W. has emerged as an angry man. Nah, I was much worse *before* the accident. It has actually mellowed me, believe it or not. |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 11:43*am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:35:00 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: I don't use it as a form of transport, only as a hobby. *Most roads The only time I've broken some bones was when I was launched over the handlebars of a bike when on holiday. I think a gym is a lot healthier. Gyms are certainly safer, and I do a great deal of my training in the gym. However, training in the gym is pretty dull, and getting out onto the open road is a lot more interesting. I'd struggle to motivate myself if I did all my training in the gym. |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:45:37 -0700 (PDT)
1506 wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. No one would wish that sort of accident on anyone. Had I known I True. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 11:54:31 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: You were claiming that British farmers could set up a cartel and cause the supermarkets, such as Tesco, to panic about their suppies. I merely pointed out that given the world wide supply chains that supermarkets, such as Tesco, have already set up, then said supermarkets, such as Tesco, were unlikely to be that worried. On the contrary , I think they'd be very worried. As I said , if they started sourcing ALL their goods from abroad the price would go up steeply. You then introduced the standard right-wing bogie man of the EU which has nothing to do with the issue. Umm hello? Farming subsidies? As for your obsession with mung beans, do British farmers actually produce such things on any great scale? You're the one who keeps mentioning them, not me. I've never eaten them, know nothing about them and nor do I care to. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
On Aug 31, 12:31*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 03:45:37 -0700 (PDT) 1506 wrote: In fact, that's my only face - following a cycling accident, the lower part of my face is paralysed, hence the rather unsuccessful attempt at a smile in that (and all other) pics. And there's us being told how healthy cycling is. No one would wish that sort of accident on anyone. *Had I known I True. No problem. No offence taken. Hell, I dole it out often enough, so it's only fair I receive some flack from time to time. |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:49:08 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: You're the one who keeps mentioning them, not me. I've never eaten them, know nothing about them and nor do I care to. You are the one that brought them up, to coin a phrase. apparently they are another right-wing bogie, er, veg... Oh FFS, it was tongue in cheek. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:40:52 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote: You are the one that brought them up, to coin a phrase. apparently they are another right-wing bogie, er, veg... Oh FFS, it was tongue in cheek. Wooosh! Whatever. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote: On 31/08/2011 09:56, d wrote: On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:33:31 +0100 Charles wrote: What happened 1000 years or even 50 years ago is irrelevant, I'm concerned about what's happening now. How far back does your "now" go ? Do you see Big Mistakes MkI and MkII as "irrelevant" ? Shall we start with 1997 when the worse thing to happen to this country in a generation got elected into power? I thought Major lost that election? I think he transposed the 9 and the 7. Sam |
1506 and Boltar
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 15:21:14 +0100
Sam Wilson wrote: I thought Major lost that election? I think he transposed the 9 and the 7. Thatcher went a bit mad in the end but at the start she was just what this country needed. Blair turned out to be a disaster from the get go. And I will admit to voting for him myself in 1997 when I was a young and naive 20 something. I'm buggered if I'll ever vote labour again however after the way they messed this country up socially AND economically. B2003 |
1506 and Boltar
In article
, Nick wrote: ... And I'm afraid that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my understanding of Christianity. I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an AOL here. Sam |
1506 and Boltar
|
1506 and Boltar
In article , d
wrote: On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT) BrianW wrote: Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a retard. One ought to feel sorry for him, really. When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions: http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249 Or was that your best Frank Spencer face? I don't think he looks that odd. Can we have one of you to compare it with - it seems only fair. Sam |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk