Thracian Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 Did anyone see Cameroon dragged in front of the cameras this morning to apologise for the farcical attempts by this government to get British people out of Libya. In fact, the much criticised company BP have managed to get a plane load of their own workers back on home soil before Cameron's planes managed to leave the UK. Did he blame the snow?.....Did he blame world prices?....No, this time he blamed technical difficulties. Never one to shy away from a bullshit excuse is Cameroon. However, one question someone should ask him is this: How come he can fly a plane load of arms dealers into the middle east and tour numerous countries with them yet he can't fly a plane load of the British general public out of Libya? Wouldn't have something to do with the fact some of those arms dealers that he was so proud to fly over to Egypt and the middle east with, selling arms to very unstable countries, were Conservative Party donors would it. At least we know who comes top of your priorities Dave. There are tens of thousands of people who will never go home again thanks to the lying bullshitters you support. But I don't suppose that'll ever change your outlook one bit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
Finnegan Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 There are tens of thousands of people who will never go home again thanks to the lying bullshitters you support. But I don't suppose that'll ever change your outlook one bit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War You apparently completely overlooked the part where he said he revoked his Labour membership when Blair came to power (not especially uncommon, my old man did the same thing.) Moreover, that's two somewhat staggeringly different situations really, isn't it?
Trav Le Bleu Posted 27 February 2011 Author Posted 27 February 2011 Not looking so shabby after the special forces desert extraction. Any other Governments doing that? We might have cuts but we still have kick ass special forces. I heard a general/colonel praising our troops for achieving this with no casualties. I've yet to see that these kind of places were under any threat of attack. The trouble is all kicking off in Tripoli. Apparently landing 2 C-130s and taking off laden with passengers is extremely perilous.
l444ry Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 There are tens of thousands of people who will never go home again thanks to the lying bullshitters you support. But I don't suppose that'll ever change your outlook one bit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War I don't recall the Tories opposing the "lying bullshitters" over the Iraq War as you put it. But I doubt that would change your outlook either. http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/public-accounts/2010/01/iraq-inquiry-blair-opposition http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/575471/the-tories-need-to-get-serious-about-iraq.thtml
Webbo Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 I don't recall the Tories opposing the "lying bullshitters" over the Iraq War as you put it. But I doubt that would change your outlook either. http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/public-accounts/2010/01/iraq-inquiry-blair-opposition http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/575471/the-tories-need-to-get-serious-about-iraq.thtml Does it really matter? Whatever the Tories' stance was on anything you'd be against it.
l444ry Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 Does it really matter? Whatever the Tories' stance was on anything you'd be against it. I was replying to Thracian and fail see the point of that stupid comment, Webbo!!
Webbo Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 I was replying to Thracian and fail see the point of that stupid comment, Webbo!! It's true though isn't it?
l444ry Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 It's true though isn't it? As I run my own businesses for near on 40 years there are some elements of Tory policies I can live with. But in general, yes, I despise what they stand for.......
Zingari Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 As I run my own businesses for near on 40 years there are some elements of Tory policies I can live with. But in general, yes, I despise what they stand for....... bloody hell l444ry , how old are you ? i thought you were an angry idealistic young man
l444ry Posted 27 February 2011 Posted 27 February 2011 bloody hell l444ry , how old are you ? i thought you were an angry idealistic young man 58 mate.....but not ready to be put out to pasture yet. And certainly not by people who seem to be prepared to see the same old mistakes made again and again by a political party that should have gone out with high-buttoned boots!!!
BoneDog Posted 1 March 2011 Posted 1 March 2011 I'm intrigued and know that I'll regret asking this, but what is the conspiracy doing the rounds? Does it involve Zionists, Masons, Lizard people or Canadians? Of course it involves Z's and M's, all major world political and terrorist events involve them (not forgetting the Jesuits)! Obviously some of them will be Canadian too but I wouldn't think any of them are Lizard Men although I wouldn't rule it out completely (but I would 99.9999% rule it out!) - after all it's a big universe and lizards and men do exist seperately, so who's to say that somewhere there isn't a race of Lizard Men! I do like to distance myself from that talk though and I won't believe in them until one shows himself on News at Ten. The secret agenda in this case starts with the usual story. See these two short links and see if you think things don't sound a bit fishy! The players behind Movements dot org: Googles Revolution Factory Then this: Soros writing Egypts new constitution That's just the start of the conspiracy and I will say no more about it at the moment - but you can probably guess, it involves oil, protecting Israel and Armageddon! Word.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 1 March 2011 Author Posted 1 March 2011 In an infinite universe, everything El Empty believes is true somewhere. FACT
Suffolk_fox Posted 1 March 2011 Posted 1 March 2011 I heard a general/colonel praising our troops for achieving this with no casualties. I've yet to see that these kind of places were under any threat of attack. The trouble is all kicking off in Tripoli. Apparently landing 2 C-130s and taking off laden with passengers is extremely perilous. Apparently there was some small arms fire and a round which hit one of the C-130s actually ricocheted off the pilot's helmet, so not exactly your average touchdown at Stansted.... Source
l444ry Posted 1 March 2011 Posted 1 March 2011 Apparently there was some small arms fire and a round which hit one of the C-130s actually ricocheted off the pilot's helmet, so not exactly your average touchdown at Stansted.... Source Thank heavens it was "friendly fire". This was no "Raid on Entebbe" - but a handy excuse to bury a bad week for Cameron and Hague. Turns out a bit different to the original spin on this incident as well!! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3438901/RAF-Libya-rescue-pilot-was-shot-in-head.html
Trav Le Bleu Posted 1 March 2011 Author Posted 1 March 2011 Thank heavens it was "friendly fire". This was no "Raid on Entebbe" - but a handy excuse to bury a bad week for Cameron and Hague. Turns out a bit different to the original spin on this incident as well!! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3438901/RAF-Libya-rescue-pilot-was-shot-in-head.html And yet the article sub-headline mention's enemy fire. That's The Sun journalism for you.
Webbo Posted 1 March 2011 Posted 1 March 2011 Thank heavens it was "friendly fire". This was no "Raid on Entebbe" - but a handy excuse to bury a bad week for Cameron and Hague. Turns out a bit different to the original spin on this incident as well!! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3438901/RAF-Libya-rescue-pilot-was-shot-in-head.html I bet the bloke who fired the shot went to Eton.
Suffolk_fox Posted 2 March 2011 Posted 2 March 2011 Yes, thank goodness it was Friendly Fire, because that is less dangerous than enemy fire!
Jon the Hat Posted 2 March 2011 Posted 2 March 2011 Yes, thank goodness it was Friendly Fire, because that is less dangerous than enemy fire! Yes it must give comfort to the RAF and the SAS to know that both sides are shooting at you.
Jackirius Posted 19 March 2011 Posted 19 March 2011 Jet shot down earlier today over Benghazi, most likely a Libyan one. France currently in the skys. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12795971 Well done the UN for finally pulling their fingers out their arses.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 March 2011 Posted 19 March 2011 Yeah good to see France and the Uk backing their diplomatic recognition of the rebels as the rightful leaders if Libya with Military support. Will be interesting to see what happens, but I can see GAdaffi being gone in the next few weeks.
Jackirius Posted 19 March 2011 Posted 19 March 2011 Will be interesting to see what happens, but I can see GAdaffi being gone in the next few weeks. Hopefully but i can't see him going down without a fight, he is a crazy bastard.
MPH Posted 19 March 2011 Posted 19 March 2011 Nice to see France being involved in a war they wont lose for once....
anotherharboroughfox Posted 19 March 2011 Posted 19 March 2011 Nice to see France being involved in a war they wont lose for once....
broughtonblue Posted 20 March 2011 Posted 20 March 2011 Nice to see France being involved in a war they wont lose for once.... They have only been involved for a couple of days, I think they managed that last time. Plenty of time for them to run away yet!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.