THE BRITISH THREAD

I certainly didn't Mathos - pleased I'm not the only one.

Mathos wrote-



If you don't understand a simple thing like that was old chap it is no good us asking your considered opinion on the Trident renewal issue.

But I'll risk it. What is your opinion on Trident and will you offer it to the Conservative candidate you mentioned knowing.

That was Mathos bragging DP. Goodstyle. In fact he never stops. Mine was sub A-level stuff and those are going out of fashion at last I hear. I can do a lot better than that.

Brits need to keep some standards up when the eyes of the world are upon them even if it is only Gus. He might know a Senator.

Trident has to be replaced Spendi, keeping up with the most modern technology as a defence issue, should never be an issue.

There may be a real threat to the UK one day, we need to be in space, we need the most advanced applicable technology, and the up to date weaponry.

You may well desire to have them lower the price of a pint and issue us all with bows and arrows, sorry! It won't work.

Yes, it is already on the agenda for discussion, along with the urgent need to get the arms deal sorted with Saudi, there are many Lancashire lads and lassies dependant on that deal going ahead.


Less of the only Gus as well, the gentleman is a scholar as well as an erudite, you can tell that by his approach to sensibility.

Are you off to the pub now?

think I should go bed

Good Lord Mathos.

I thought you were a pacifist. It turns out I was mistaken. You are in favour then of us having the capacity to obliterate whole cities in revenge for something or other. Nursing homes, stray cat havens, red light districts, primary schools, art galleries- the lot. I assume you wouldn't want to go first. Being a pacifist and all. You would use nukes if pushed beyond your toleration points.

What are your toleration limits?

The price of beer has nothing to do with it. That is set to avoid the gutters being full of sleeping drunks. It would be £2 a pint whether Trident is uprated or not.

England 5 for 77 in second innings!

YES!

Historic win.

Collingwood for man of the match though double century in the first and n/o in the second.

The Urn: come to pappa baby, come on home.

Does that mean England won?

If so - congrats

If not - congrats to the Aussies

x

Gus sweetie,

I was going to post on that there USA thread, you know - to try and bump it up the ranks a little...

But I didn't want to intrude on the jingoistic claptrap.

So, there it is, still laguishing down in the murky depths of A2K.

I think my fellow Brits, being so sportsperson like, will join me in donning our cheerleaders outfits, plumping our pom-poms (no jokes please Aussies) and will join in with me, as I chant a rousing GO USA! and all that...

OK team, give me a G

Give me an U

Give me an S

Ooops, sorry Gus, we are too few to do your whole name

Doesn't add up really, when you think about it - that we few... we merry few... and I'm including suspendy, can keep this little corner, our green and pleasent land, our little patch of A2K, consistantly in the the top five threads

Your humble cousin

smorgs

x

Mathos wrote-



Be careful Mathos. I got some stick talking about job creation schemes and here's you saying the Saudi Eurofighter deal, which is under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office, is just that.

The daft thing is that the £15 billion (is it?) is what we paid them for their oil so that the Yo-yo lifestyle could swing at full tilt. And don't forget that Mr Bush called it an "addiction" in the major speech of the year.

So our "addicts" have funded the deal. Thus we have paid for their planes. Very good.

Bit tricky isn't it?

Do you think we will get the thread to 3000 by Xmas?

x

You bet we will smorgsi..

Spendi

We need an ultimate deterrent or insurance if you like against the menace of a rogue nuclear power, or one of the new nations now steadfast in their pursuit of nuclear technology. Iran or North korea for instance are capable of sponsoring nuclear terrorism.

I have no desire to see any nation nuked. Hope it never happens.

Our present nuclear facilities are 'old fashioned' to say the least.

Mr Blair, previously a member of The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, emphasised his commitment to the Trident project, stating he wasn't worried if the old lefties rebelled, he would ignore them and rely on Tory 'full support'

I don't know if your in the real world Spendi, or stuck fast in your books?

We need to know we are capable of defending this small nation of ours and will never be subject to nuclear blackmail.

If you want to ramble on about job creation schemes, so what?

The arms deal with Saudi is extremely important to us, we don't want to throw it away, do we? It is common knowledge that backhanders in the arms business, oil business, etc are well tainted with bribes and favours behind closed doors. It would be very nice to have it all above board, it's not how it works though.


Job creation schemes are part of existence Spendi, we all know that, you simply ridicule people for your own benefit or pleasure and that is wrong!

If you happen to be so clever that your working life, (whatever it might have been) was not a job creation scheme, then please tell us. We can have a whip round and build a big temple in your name.

If we all sat on the sofa all day mischief making, life would be extremely drab.

Mathos

I agree - finding useful, productive employment for people is one of the primary responsibilities of society and (as its representative) of goverernment.

Another is defence. I've never liked the idea of nuclear weapons in use but it is evidence of our government doing what they believe to be right to protect the nation's interests.

The comments above about doctors and nurses creating long term sickness to keep their incomes up is, frankly, a conspiracy theory rather than anything based in fact. Of course, there is some iatrogenic disease but it's more the result of human fallability than design.

Apart from your dislike of the Gunners, I'm feeling "on your side"!

KP

I know you're being serious and everything, but...

http://www.prettypolly.co.uk/fashion/default.htm

If you click on the picture showing two sets of legs...

THOSE! The pair on the right - the sparkly fishnets...

I really want a pair of those for Christmas (and me two front teeth).

Someone I know will read this and may want a suggestion...

Thanks for your indulgence

x

...and I don't mean you, sussy.

I'm not after your coffers and vast estates.

Hey, I should ask an American (shame I took the piss out of the USA thread). They're used to buying nylons for gals...

Oh, gus, baby, I really didn't mean it - I was jus' teasin' y'all...

Wouldn't you like to see me sat on your garden bench in a pair of sparkly fishnets?

x

Blimey smorgsi, some cracking pins on there!


Pete

Thanks for your comments Pete, it's common sense really.

60 million or so in this country and they need to keep most of us occupied.
The money is a tease, it's only bits of paper, limited in its supply (when they want it to be) with a job to do.

Defence of the nation is of prime importance, we appear to be in receipt of good intelligence as well. That costs money.

Mistakes are made, that is human error as a rule, and is difficult to eradicate.

All in all quite a good job is done here, but there are some problems with 'deals' and of course social events, street violence being an important issue.

We will improve though.

Gunners!!!! Who have they shot lately? :wink:

Did you see what margo and dadpad said about our gallant heroes toiling in the sun wishing they were back in England.

What they didn't tell you was that they brought in some extra seagulls and they had men in the crowd bursting paper bags every time Shane Warne's hand released the ball and stooping to such low down tricks is the work of double-dyed, scheming bunch of no-good warthogswart hairs.

Had Mr Flintoff known he was dealing with such a strategy, putting it as politely as I can, he would never have declared and England would have posted 7 or 8 hundred on such a pitch and left them to it.

© Daily Mail
It's good to know that the British Transport Police are keeping public transport in London safe from would-be criminals. Last week, they cautioned a man carrying a hockey stick, apparently unimpressed with his rather feeble excuse that he was on his way to play a match. Now The Times reports that Chris Hurd was accosted by a policewoman at Baker Street (near Lord's) and told that the cricket ball he was holding was a "potentially lethal weapon"

Mr Hurd, who was wearing a suit and had just finished work at the major City firm Ernst & Young, said yesterday: 'It was a ridiculous over-reaction. She was completely humourless and inflexible, and showed no understanding of my excitement about the Ashes.

'But she confiscated the ball for most of our conversation, gave me a verbal warning and said she was being very lenient. She filled out a stop-and-search form and finally gave the ball back at the end and sent me packing.'

But a spokesman for the police raised a hitherto unforeseen danger: "What if the ball was dropped and hit an old lady further down the escalator? "

dadpad

You may not be aware of this but the Daily Mail is always full of scare-mongering and fear-provoking rubbish masquerading as journalism.

It undermines any confidence readers have in a society and its agents (police, civil service, healthcare providers, etc.) and has always sought to paint a bleak picture of Britain since Labour has been in government.

Ernst & Young employs new graduates and, as such, these are no different from other students except that they get paid for the first time. I myself was once in a similar position at a rival firm (arguably a superior one) and can vouch that it is not a guarantee of upstanding character!

Frankly, I find it quite believeable that (under certain circumstances) cricket balls and hockey sticks, if carried openly (which presumably the ball was, if it was notices) could be considered dangerous weapons. I find the policewoman very sensible to confiscate the ball while discussing matters with the suspect and establishing that he had no intention of using it destructively.

I'm sure most of the participants in this thread would agree with some or all of my sentiments - except Spendi, of course, who's probably a Mail reader himself.

KP

whilst not wishing to be re classified in the Spendius camp, I do find it hard to believe that a police officer could have thought a cricket ball in the hand of any Englishman could pose a danger to anyone, especially Australians.