Supersonic Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 Spineless jellyfish or what???? plus we have an Italian in charge of the English football team??? I give up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 I prefer any Italian, even Mussolini, to Brown! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 so what if we do have an I tie in charge of our "best" we have a jock in charge of the ENGLISH parliament thats the worst of the two is it not? cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Outlaw Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 Both of them are bad news for My/Our England IMHO Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 Brown is not bright, thinks very slowly, no sense of humour and unelectable. He is on borrowed time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myuserid Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 You should have created a poll, would have been interesting to see the %. By the looks of the replies so far, he is 100% ****** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckytrigger Posted December 13, 2007 Report Share Posted December 13, 2007 Total ****** .His government is sending this country down the toilet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salisburykeeper Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 definatly a ******, but to be honest if he wasnt doing it there would def be some other ***** in his place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidibear Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Remember Dunblane? Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? Not Fabio Cappelo, surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floating Chamber Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Remember Dunblane? Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? It's been 10 years this March. Without starting a new thread, can someone tell me why the 'findings' of this case have another 90 years in hiding? Also, someone, somewhere must know the contents and how much can 'they' be bought for? What do we know amongst us about the findings and why is it so secret? Who is being protected and why? Are they Masons, paedophiles, boy-scout /choir-boy fanciers? The outcome punished 57,000 shooters and I'm P****** off with the secrecy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Outlaw Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Tell us Sidibear what do you know? Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berettaman1 Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Remember Dunblane? Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? It's been 10 years this March. Without starting a new thread, can someone tell me why the 'findings' of this case have another 90 years in hiding? Also, someone, somewhere must know the contents and how much can 'they' be bought for? What do we know amongst us about the findings and why is it so secret? Who is being protected and why? Are they Masons, paedophiles, boy-scout /choir-boy fanciers? The outcome punished 57,000 shooters and I'm P****** off with the secrecy. No Allan, no secrecy about it, it was the deputy Chief Constable who, overrid the constable fao officers concern about ****** Hamiltons mental state and rumours of his activities re, children. The Deputy took early retirement when this terrible attrocity took place, and is, as far as I know still enjoying his huge index linked pension!!! ******* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbob Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 How long was Brown Chancelloer of the exchecher he was our mp and did **** all about tolls on the Forth Road Bridge ( the only bridge in scotland with a toll on it ) Now salmond was in power less than three months and he's binning them . Let have a election browns not got the bottle to go to the country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Remember Dunblane? Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? It's been 10 years this March. Without starting a new thread, can someone tell me why the 'findings' of this case have another 90 years in hiding? Also, someone, somewhere must know the contents and how much can 'they' be bought for? What do we know amongst us about the findings and why is it so secret? Who is being protected and why? Are they Masons, paedophiles, boy-scout /choir-boy fanciers? The outcome punished 57,000 shooters and I'm P****** off with the secrecy. Read the book ( Dunblane unburied ) by sandra uttley then you will know why the 100 year rule was invoked. cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gully Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Allegedly it was George Robertson MP (now Lord Robertson, head of NATO). There's a lot of conspiracy theories about the fact that Hamilton allegedley procured young boys for alleged parties allegedly attended by senior scottish labour members and that the FBI led Operation Ore into credit cards used for child porn allegedly threw up the names of a few senior politicians. We already know that a few senior policemen were also named. The theorists say that the US allegedly blackmailed blair into the gulf war to prevent his his government falling. The home office slapped a D notice on all this at the time (as they do on almost anything interesting such as Blair's daughter's suicide attempt). It is funny that all the files on this are not due for public release for 100 years which is very rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wookie Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Exactly how "Tinfoil hat" is all this? I mean, is any of this really true, or is it all pub talk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul65 Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 I can't post a word to describe my opinion of Brown, it'll be modded and possibly get me banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsmyth Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Surely the blame for this ''Scottish invasion'' rests squarely on the shoulders of the voters in the last election !!! I guess it's just payback time for the '' sins '' of our fathers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Surely the blame for this ''Scottish invasion'' rests squarely on the shoulders of the voters in the last election !!! I guess it's just payback time for the '' sins '' of our fathers. I dont remember voting for brown Come to think of it Blair either! I will be voting for the Wildfowlers who like the odd beer and a curry party next time round Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted December 14, 2007 Report Share Posted December 14, 2007 Remember Dunblane? Have a guess who allegedly signed Thomas Hamilton's FAC application? It's been 10 years this March. Without starting a new thread, can someone tell me why the 'findings' of this case have another 90 years in hiding? Also, someone, somewhere must know the contents and how much can 'they' be bought for? What do we know amongst us about the findings and why is it so secret? Who is being protected and why? Are they Masons, paedophiles, boy-scout /choir-boy fanciers? The outcome punished 57,000 shooters and I'm P****** off with the secrecy. Quite simple: Any document (rightly or wrongly) deemed "sensitive" by the agency creating it will be given a "declassify on" date according to the level of protection afforded to it (which depends on the content). Someone somewhere will know the contents, but any attempt to release them via non official channels will lead to a hefty jail sentence for both requester and provider. Who is being protected? It's unlikely anybody is being directly protected; these things tend to have an arbitrary classification assigned to them for the reasons given above. If a particular individual is spared a red face due to the length of classification it is simple luck for them; the system has been around much longer than they have (which is why we see plans to send rats with grenades up their bums into nazi bunkers etc coming out now!) Such documents will be covered by the classification of the most protected material in it (ie coroners reports on the dead/family details etc), which will push the level right up. Whilst the document would probably provide interesting (and very grim) reading, would it's release make any difference to the current laws (I doubt it)?. If it grips you that badly submit a FOI request, but dont hold your breath! ZB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossy835 Posted December 15, 2007 Report Share Posted December 15, 2007 the mans a pxxxk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.