Given the above, to be suspicious is normal, so that is why I laugh when you lad say I am talking ****e.
It's a big jump is what it is. For example if it turns out there are a couple of ****s in a local council, one person has worked closely with them both for years and has never suspected a thing. By your logic that person would be a ****. Your basing your opinion on coincidence and circumstance rather than any actual proof of any sort. I get where you are coming from but think you've decided on a conclusion without having the evidence to get to said conclusion.
To be suspicious and to accuse are two different things Edit: and making such huge accusations in such a confident way I'd expect you to have evidence to support your position, or at the very least to expect to be challenged on it.
It's my opinion. You also need to admit you are willing to jump to the defence of the Royals at any chance given, that is pretty clear at least admit it, your reasons for not being suspicious are not based in events or anything else other than your Royalist outlook. I'm not out to "get" anyone. Prince Andrew was a chum of without doubt a well known ****, Jeffrey Epstein who like Savile provided childen for the "upper class", there is no way on earth he did not know because EVERYONE knew Savile ditto, by 1990 everyone in upper circles knew about Savile. Now when the Beeb knew, becuse they killed the expose on him in 2011.. then you know everyone knew. The journos involved in that were forced out of the BBC too. If all that doesn't make you suspicious I an only asume you have your Royalist blinkers on mate. But yes that is my opinion.
yeah i think that's fair shout I gave this up yesterday, and Tobes kicked it off again. damn you Tobias
Yes, but most of those pics on Google Images WERE in the Sc*m! I always thought Savile was g4y, you know.
Anyroadup, Corbyn wants to re-nationalise the railways, which are now owned by other people. This will involve buying them back, won't it, so who will pay for that? Probably you, me, the dog and the cat.
Well if you look at it another way, it's an investment in the future of the country, rainways if properly run are quite profitable. VR here in Finalnd is a state owned monopoly, meaning no competitors, and I have to say, the bus rail and tram system is fantastic. Obviously because it is all the one setup, it is all brilliantly inter connected rather than several private companies doing things independently as they see fit. Not only are they efficient and very handy, if you buy a bus ticket you can use it on any other bus within 1 hour, and if you are a parent with a child in a buggy, you don't pay anything. State owned VR profits. This should be how it is, a state owned company making profits and providing an excellent service http://www.vrgroup.fi/en/vrgroup/ne...t-in-vr-groups-operating-profit-060320141407/ 2012 profit for the financial year amounted to EUR 65.3 (38.8) million.. for the state coffers
38 million doesn't seem a lot but keep in mind the population of Finland is only 6 million. The UK is 64 million and sees major tourism.. run efficiently that's a pretty big profit maker for the state. Money that can go into other services like education for example, helping towards wiping out tuition fees could be supported by such a move. The £100bn + for the Tridents.. 1\7th of the 700 billion Cameron has stacked up on future generations... and hmmm I wonder what companies end up with that cash ? £100bn into schemes for SMEs that is what helps improve the economy not tax cuts for corporations. Corporate expansion is primarily market related not tax related, tax is a consideration of expansion not a driver. A corporation won't expand if there is not the business there to actually make a ****ing profit from. Investment in SMEs and lower vat and tax generates growth and that growth in spending is what prompts corporations to expand and hire more people. It's the Tories turn at the trough literally, just like Nigeria actually, who do you think taught the Nigerians politics
So the army are saying they won't do as ordered if cuts are made and they disagreed with the country's leaders, well if that PM was Corbyn that is. Pretty sure threatening mutiny is enough to send you to the brigg these days, that General should be cleaning toilets by the end of the day, but no, he didn't say mutiny against the Tories British Army 'could stage mutiny under Corbyn', says senior serving general http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...byn-says-senior-serving-general-10509742.html
Hasn't corbyn already said despite his position being anti trident, that won't be labours position? Just like his views on Europe... I wonder how many more things he will compromise on...
Making compromise if a good thing, it's pragmatic, having a set agenda that you will carry out despite the realities involved and so on would be.. Hitlerish Whatever the government decides the army should shut up and do as they are told, The UK's not a banana republic where the army thinks it is its own entity, it takes orders from government end of.
