David Cameron berated by Southampton University students

Daily Echo: David Cameron David Cameron

CONSERVATIVE leader David Cameron hit the election trail in Hampshire today.

But the Tory came under fire from students on a visit to the University of Southampton.

While touring the student services building he was tackled by student Chloe Green, who criticised him over his education policies.

The 19-year-old, from Dorset, accused him of doing nothing to help the working class and getting rid of vital funding for poorer students.

Daily Echo: Click below to see a video of today's headlines in sixty seconds

After confronting him as he met other students, she was told by Mr Cameron that, although a Tory administration would keep tuition fees, it would protect bursaries and other efforts to get young people from poorer backgrounds into top universities.

But the English literature student - who said she supported the Liberal Democrats but was not a member of any party and was not certain yet how she would vote - told him bluntly: "I do not believe you."

Ms Green said later: "I went to a comprehensive and I'm working class and I would not be here if the Government did not give me a lot of money - my parents could not afford it."

Asked if she had been convinced by Mr Cameron's answers, she said: "Absolutely not. He just told me Labour were talking rubbish, as he always does."

Then as Mr Cameron arrived for the tour of the sustainable energy department with Southampton Tory candidates Jeremy Moulton and Royston Smith he was heckled by history and politics student Sam Hall, 21.

Mr Hall, from Reading, a Labour supporter, wanted to know why students should have to pay interest on their loans and why the Tories proposed discounts to those who paid back them back more quickly.

He shouted at the Tory leader three times adding: “Dave I thought you were a man of the people.”

Mr Cameron insisted he would get a “straight” answer from the Tories - unlike the other parties - but then ducked into the civil engineering block where he was given a tour by professor of sustainable energy AbuBakr Bahaj.

Comments (132)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:44pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Bartonian says...

Maybe Mr Cameron and the rest of the political establishment, tell us about one thing that is not even making the news:

"COMMON PURPOSE"

He is involved in this, and Mandleson who heads all of the EU quango motivated funding, not to mention Brown.

This is a big threat to our demcracy and a further blow to our civil liberties. Have a look at www.tpuc.org and ask Cameron what his so-called "democracy taskforce" is all about and why he has appointed the Bilderburger Kenneth Clarke to run it.
Maybe Mr Cameron and the rest of the political establishment, tell us about one thing that is not even making the news: "COMMON PURPOSE" He is involved in this, and Mandleson who heads all of the EU quango motivated funding, not to mention Brown. This is a big threat to our demcracy and a further blow to our civil liberties. Have a look at www.tpuc.org and ask Cameron what his so-called "democracy taskforce" is all about and why he has appointed the Bilderburger Kenneth Clarke to run it. Bartonian
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Mon 26 Apr 10

St Retford says...

Chloe, you're a hero.

The thought of waking up next Friday with David CaMORON (cheers) as prime minister scares the life out of me.
Chloe, you're a hero. The thought of waking up next Friday with David CaMORON (cheers) as prime minister scares the life out of me. St Retford
  • Score: 0

12:55pm Mon 26 Apr 10

joenice says...

Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!! joenice
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Brite Spark says...

Don't ask for a studen grant to help with education, you've got no chance under the Conservatives. Ask for £2,000 from the tax payers so you can put a duck house in your garden in Titchfield, no problem!
Don't ask for a studen grant to help with education, you've got no chance under the Conservatives. Ask for £2,000 from the tax payers so you can put a duck house in your garden in Titchfield, no problem! Brite Spark
  • Score: 0

12:59pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

Under the last Tory government she'd have received a full maintanance grant and not had to pay tuition fees. Selective memory?
Under the last Tory government she'd have received a full maintanance grant and not had to pay tuition fees. Selective memory? Condor Man
  • Score: 0

1:00pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
[quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all. southy
  • Score: 0

1:03pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Condor Man wrote:
Under the last Tory government she'd have received a full maintanance grant and not had to pay tuition fees. Selective memory?
that was some thing the old labour party set up, and was destoryed by the last tory government just it never came into effect till after the torys was out off office, and this government is no different from the tory pary. an its because of this is why people are looking at the liberals to vote for.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Under the last Tory government she'd have received a full maintanance grant and not had to pay tuition fees. Selective memory?[/p][/quote]that was some thing the old labour party set up, and was destoryed by the last tory government just it never came into effect till after the torys was out off office, and this government is no different from the tory pary. an its because of this is why people are looking at the liberals to vote for. southy
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Stubs says...

I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.
I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit. Stubs
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Mon 26 Apr 10

St Retford says...

Stubs wrote:
I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.
Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country.
[quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.[/p][/quote]Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country. St Retford
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.[/p][/quote]It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers? v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Lone Ranger says...

I guess he didn't stay too long then.
.
I guess he didn't stay too long then. . Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?
true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax.
but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours.
what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.[/p][/quote]It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?[/p][/quote]true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax. but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours. what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education. southy
  • Score: 0

1:38pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Shoong says...

"But the English literature student - who said she supported the Liberal Democrats but was not a member of any party and was not certain yet how she would vote - told him bluntly: "I do not believe you."

In other words, a hippie.
"But the English literature student - who said she supported the Liberal Democrats but was not a member of any party and was not certain yet how she would vote - told him bluntly: "I do not believe you." In other words, a hippie. Shoong
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Mon 26 Apr 10

The Wickham Man says...

St Retford wrote:
Stubs wrote:
I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.
Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country.
Michael Schumacher?
[quote][p][bold]St Retford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.[/p][/quote]Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country.[/p][/quote]Michael Schumacher? The Wickham Man
  • Score: 0

1:43pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?
true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax.
but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours.
what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.
What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.[/p][/quote]It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?[/p][/quote]true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax. but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours. what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.[/p][/quote]What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

1:44pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Lone Ranger wrote:
I guess he didn't stay too long then.
.
no he ran fast before any one could ask him in how come, that 2 of his members have put them selfs up for election in national and local government on the same day, namely royston smith and jeremy moulton, i could under stand it if there term of councilors was not due end till next year or the year after. but its a case that there term runs out on the same day, and they both knew that they would be standing for the mp jobs, but still allowed there names to stay on the local election list, both should be force to stand down from one of those election and rename some one else in there place. it dont matter whitch.
it just shows how much there greed is for power and money, you added it all up mp wage plus expensives councilor and expensives plus there jobs will bring in wages to them to, and being an mp is a full time job and not a part time job so how are they going to have time to do there other jobs.
there is a real need for new partys to take control over the country this lot we have now days think of there pockets first and people last.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: I guess he didn't stay too long then. .[/p][/quote]no he ran fast before any one could ask him in how come, that 2 of his members have put them selfs up for election in national and local government on the same day, namely royston smith and jeremy moulton, i could under stand it if there term of councilors was not due end till next year or the year after. but its a case that there term runs out on the same day, and they both knew that they would be standing for the mp jobs, but still allowed there names to stay on the local election list, both should be force to stand down from one of those election and rename some one else in there place. it dont matter whitch. it just shows how much there greed is for power and money, you added it all up mp wage plus expensives councilor and expensives plus there jobs will bring in wages to them to, and being an mp is a full time job and not a part time job so how are they going to have time to do there other jobs. there is a real need for new partys to take control over the country this lot we have now days think of there pockets first and people last. southy
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Mon 26 Apr 10

bpsaint says...

The only hope this country has is if Cameron wins. God help us if there is a hung parliament, which an INDEPENDENT think tank estimates will cost each family approximately £5000. As for this student saying she considers herself to be a Lib Dem, just look at their policies which should frighten the life out af all of us:
- get rid of the pound in favour of the Euro
- votes for all serving criminals including murderers, rapists and child abusers
- more lenient sentences for criminals
- restricting the power of the courts to send drug dealers and other serious offenders to jail
- no female shoplifter to be ever sent to jail no matter how prolific their crimes
- more emphasis on the Human Rights Act behind which so many criminals hide
- higher taxes and NI contributions
A vote for the Lib Dems is literally a vote for criminals
The only hope this country has is if Cameron wins. God help us if there is a hung parliament, which an INDEPENDENT think tank estimates will cost each family approximately £5000. As for this student saying she considers herself to be a Lib Dem, just look at their policies which should frighten the life out af all of us: - get rid of the pound in favour of the Euro - votes for all serving criminals including murderers, rapists and child abusers - more lenient sentences for criminals - restricting the power of the courts to send drug dealers and other serious offenders to jail - no female shoplifter to be ever sent to jail no matter how prolific their crimes - more emphasis on the Human Rights Act behind which so many criminals hide - higher taxes and NI contributions A vote for the Lib Dems is literally a vote for criminals bpsaint
  • Score: 0

1:49pm Mon 26 Apr 10

teh says...

UKIP all the way. Thanks.
UKIP all the way. Thanks. teh
  • Score: 0

1:51pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Brite Spark says...

He's in Romsey now, he'll feel right at home there, lots of ducks.
He's in Romsey now, he'll feel right at home there, lots of ducks. Brite Spark
  • Score: 0

1:53pm Mon 26 Apr 10

St Retford says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
St Retford wrote:
Stubs wrote: I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.
Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country.
Michael Schumacher?
God, you're right. The two of them could be twins. Although the only thing that David Cameron is good at driving is me round the bend.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]St Retford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: I hope cameron does not get in. Dont trust them one bit.[/p][/quote]Me neither. I think it's his mouth. Have you ever seen a man with such a tiny mouth compared to the rest of his face? You can't trust someone like that to run the country.[/p][/quote]Michael Schumacher?[/p][/quote]God, you're right. The two of them could be twins. Although the only thing that David Cameron is good at driving is me round the bend. St Retford
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?
true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax.
but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours.
what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.
What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures.
yes and who started all this massage of the unemployment figures to find that out you will need to go back to the 1980's for that. ah right we are back at the time when all this trouble started the maggie the school kids milk snatcher tory party. it was here when the figures of unemployment was first being fix and from maggie era we have never known what the true unemployment figures have been ever since. ( maggie was the one who remove people at a working age that was in education from the unemployment list ) ever since she had gone the unemployment list has been coming down, just think even under her hiding the numbers of unemployed it pass 6 million unemployed and that was only those who was short term unemployed ( short term unemployed is those who was unemployed between 6 weeks and 6 mths out side of this time period and you was not counted on the unemployment figures) it was estimated that there was another 4 million people unemployed on top of that 6 million that did not get counted.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.[/p][/quote]It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?[/p][/quote]true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax. but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours. what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.[/p][/quote]What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures.[/p][/quote]yes and who started all this massage of the unemployment figures to find that out you will need to go back to the 1980's for that. ah right we are back at the time when all this trouble started the maggie the school kids milk snatcher tory party. it was here when the figures of unemployment was first being fix and from maggie era we have never known what the true unemployment figures have been ever since. ( maggie was the one who remove people at a working age that was in education from the unemployment list ) ever since she had gone the unemployment list has been coming down, just think even under her hiding the numbers of unemployed it pass 6 million unemployed and that was only those who was short term unemployed ( short term unemployed is those who was unemployed between 6 weeks and 6 mths out side of this time period and you was not counted on the unemployment figures) it was estimated that there was another 4 million people unemployed on top of that 6 million that did not get counted. southy
  • Score: 0

2:00pm Mon 26 Apr 10

My View from the Hill says...

Fair play to Chloe,

I used to despise tax dodging layabout students but after reading this I just don't like them, but anyone who see's this Tory leader exactly for what he and party is, goes up in my humble opinion.

It beggars belief that that two Tory candidate's in Southampton are standing for two election's on the same day, talk about having no confidence in their own ability to govern either local or nationally, personally I would not vote for either of them in both elections, then on May 7th they could both go back to work and allow me to read my Echo without having to see the cheesy grin's all over the paper.

I hope people get confused on the ballot paper and make an error so they get no vote's.

The headline could read something like this "Royston and Jeremy dumped by confused Southampton electorate"

That'll learn um
Fair play to Chloe, I used to despise tax dodging layabout students but after reading this I just don't like them, but anyone who see's this Tory leader exactly for what he and party is, goes up in my humble opinion. It beggars belief that that two Tory candidate's in Southampton are standing for two election's on the same day, talk about having no confidence in their own ability to govern either local or nationally, personally I would not vote for either of them in both elections, then on May 7th they could both go back to work and allow me to read my Echo without having to see the cheesy grin's all over the paper. I hope people get confused on the ballot paper and make an error so they get no vote's. The headline could read something like this "Royston and Jeremy dumped by confused Southampton electorate" That'll learn um My View from the Hill
  • Score: 0

2:06pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

2:16pm Mon 26 Apr 10

allsaintsnocurves says...

yes a couple of responses on here that didn't surprise me! At the end of the day Labour can say they will throw more money at education the NHS and whatever to be frank but what that basically boils down to is they are going to be wasting more of our money! Labour has never insured that what money they put into public services goes to the right places...it goes into a black hole full of red tape and lost amongst administration costs. If you cut a lot of these costs out and simplify the services then any money you give it will be better used!

It's a simple choice really...if you think Education and all the other public services are brilliant at the moment then vote Labour they've had the last 13 years to get them this good so congratulations to them...
yes a couple of responses on here that didn't surprise me! At the end of the day Labour can say they will throw more money at education the NHS and whatever to be frank but what that basically boils down to is they are going to be wasting more of our money! Labour has never insured that what money they put into public services goes to the right places...it goes into a black hole full of red tape and lost amongst administration costs. If you cut a lot of these costs out and simplify the services then any money you give it will be better used! It's a simple choice really...if you think Education and all the other public services are brilliant at the moment then vote Labour they've had the last 13 years to get them this good so congratulations to them... allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

2:18pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
joenice wrote:
Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers.

Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!!
your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.
It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?
true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax.
but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours.
what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.
What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures.
yes and who started all this massage of the unemployment figures to find that out you will need to go back to the 1980's for that. ah right we are back at the time when all this trouble started the maggie the school kids milk snatcher tory party. it was here when the figures of unemployment was first being fix and from maggie era we have never known what the true unemployment figures have been ever since. ( maggie was the one who remove people at a working age that was in education from the unemployment list ) ever since she had gone the unemployment list has been coming down, just think even under her hiding the numbers of unemployed it pass 6 million unemployed and that was only those who was short term unemployed ( short term unemployed is those who was unemployed between 6 weeks and 6 mths out side of this time period and you was not counted on the unemployment figures) it was estimated that there was another 4 million people unemployed on top of that 6 million that did not get counted.
I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]joenice[/bold] wrote: Just think if she was your girlfriend, I hate all this I'm working class rubbish, studying english, cheers. Students are all usually Lib Dems and Labour and these students are always annoying!!!![/p][/quote]your wrong most uni students come from a well off back ground, people of the lower classes cant afford uni, thats why all this loan business, whitch should never be, it should be free to all.[/p][/quote]It never was free. The lecturers do like paying you know. It has to be paid for one way or another, any volunteers?[/p][/quote]true its not free we all pay for it one way or another, mainly though income tax. but no one should pay extra for any type of education. after all you and every one else is investing in the generation of kids to come, its there world next not ours. what would be next every one paying for infants and junior school education.[/p][/quote]What our kids world will need is a balance of university educated people and others that will actually have the skills to build what the university educated people design. The huge number of people in further education is due to THIS government trying to massage the unemployment figures. If you are on the “in education” list you cant be on the “Unemployed” list. They are very good at doing the same with crime figures.[/p][/quote]yes and who started all this massage of the unemployment figures to find that out you will need to go back to the 1980's for that. ah right we are back at the time when all this trouble started the maggie the school kids milk snatcher tory party. it was here when the figures of unemployment was first being fix and from maggie era we have never known what the true unemployment figures have been ever since. ( maggie was the one who remove people at a working age that was in education from the unemployment list ) ever since she had gone the unemployment list has been coming down, just think even under her hiding the numbers of unemployed it pass 6 million unemployed and that was only those who was short term unemployed ( short term unemployed is those who was unemployed between 6 weeks and 6 mths out side of this time period and you was not counted on the unemployment figures) it was estimated that there was another 4 million people unemployed on top of that 6 million that did not get counted.[/p][/quote]I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better. southy
  • Score: 0

2:21pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

what gives you the right to comment on Southern matters? If you want to live up north comment up there.
what gives you the right to comment on Southern matters? If you want to live up north comment up there. Condor Man
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Mon 26 Apr 10

My View from the Hill says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Well said that man,

I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job, My View from the Hill
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.
Ok. Lets all go back in to education as its our right. Who needs people to actualy do anything.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.[/p][/quote]Ok. Lets all go back in to education as its our right. Who needs people to actualy do anything. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.
Oh southy, you are so very wrong. The Right want people to improve themselves by their own means. There is no restriction on how far you can get. As you seem to be in favour of the state controlling the means of production, and everything else in our lives, your comments seem a bit rich.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.[/p][/quote]Oh southy, you are so very wrong. The Right want people to improve themselves by their own means. There is no restriction on how far you can get. As you seem to be in favour of the state controlling the means of production, and everything else in our lives, your comments seem a bit rich. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

2:25pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 said
"I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties."

first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people
v_dubman2005 said "I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties." first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people southy
  • Score: 0

2:28pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies? Condor Man
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 said
"I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties."

first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Invented by the right.....Ha ha ha ha
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: v_dubman2005 said "I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties." first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Invented by the right.....Ha ha ha ha v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

2:37pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.
Oh southy, you are so very wrong. The Right want people to improve themselves by their own means. There is no restriction on how far you can get. As you seem to be in favour of the state controlling the means of production, and everything else in our lives, your comments seem a bit rich.
no i not wrong look at history in it self to get your answers, once the ordinary people stated to get education and by the way the right tired to block educating the poor when the liberals bought the act in to power, the right even used the house of lords to try and block it. but it got pass after a number of amendments and the final stage of a rule being put in place where the house of lords could no longer block it.
any way when the poor started to get educated the right have been losing there strangle grip hold over the ordinary people, and new ideas started to form. a new way of political thinking and thinking that is still evolving.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.[/p][/quote]Oh southy, you are so very wrong. The Right want people to improve themselves by their own means. There is no restriction on how far you can get. As you seem to be in favour of the state controlling the means of production, and everything else in our lives, your comments seem a bit rich.[/p][/quote]no i not wrong look at history in it self to get your answers, once the ordinary people stated to get education and by the way the right tired to block educating the poor when the liberals bought the act in to power, the right even used the house of lords to try and block it. but it got pass after a number of amendments and the final stage of a rule being put in place where the house of lords could no longer block it. any way when the poor started to get educated the right have been losing there strangle grip hold over the ordinary people, and new ideas started to form. a new way of political thinking and thinking that is still evolving. southy
  • Score: 0

2:40pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,
Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?
[quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,[/p][/quote]Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege? Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Condor Man wrote:
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor southy
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Mon 26 Apr 10

MrGMan says...

So a lib dem voter thought she would try and be clever and asked Cameron a question, got an answer and then said she still didn't believe him. Genius. I bet she felt very smug.
So a lib dem voter thought she would try and be clever and asked Cameron a question, got an answer and then said she still didn't believe him. Genius. I bet she felt very smug. MrGMan
  • Score: 0

3:04pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 said
"I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties."

first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Invented by the right.....Ha ha ha ha
well its either that or you believe in what people like arthur c clark says that your gods are space alliens. whitch is a very slim posabilty and looking at that v part of your name about says it all
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: v_dubman2005 said "I would not be at all surprised to find out that God is a socialist and that the devil swaps between all the other political parties." first of all you need to prove that there is a god for the devil to excise, but the truth of the matter is that god or gods is man made and was only invented by right wing people to be able to control the masses of ordinary people[/p][/quote]Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Invented by the right.....Ha ha ha ha[/p][/quote]well its either that or you believe in what people like arthur c clark says that your gods are space alliens. whitch is a very slim posabilty and looking at that v part of your name about says it all southy
  • Score: 0

3:09pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Redback says...

Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher. Redback
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

Redback wrote:
Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
[quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor
I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder.

Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor[/p][/quote]I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder. Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth? v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Mon 26 Apr 10

SotonNorth says...

What these students forget is that it was Labour who made them pay £3250 per year tuition fees, and even though students now pay £3250 every year when it was previously funded by government, students are getting worse value for money. For example, contact hours with lecturers has fallen significantly. This was happening before the recession. And there is business that recognises that students are coming out of university with poorer qualifications than graduates several years earlier. Labour is only interested in churning the masses through university to try and make their statistics look good, with many of these students doing pretty useless degrees that do barely anything for their employability.
What these students forget is that it was Labour who made them pay £3250 per year tuition fees, and even though students now pay £3250 every year when it was previously funded by government, students are getting worse value for money. For example, contact hours with lecturers has fallen significantly. This was happening before the recession. And there is business that recognises that students are coming out of university with poorer qualifications than graduates several years earlier. Labour is only interested in churning the masses through university to try and make their statistics look good, with many of these students doing pretty useless degrees that do barely anything for their employability. SotonNorth
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote:
Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one.
and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons. southy
  • Score: 0

3:58pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Red&White Power says...

A couple of gobby students, big deal !

Their problems will be down to the labour party.

The conservatives need to save the country just like they did in the early 80s. Funny enough just after another disastrous labour government.

As for Clegg and his personality another big deal ! Comical policies made up drunk in his dads chateaux in frog land.


I think its about time the daily echo got some senior reporters and stopped relying on spotty 20 somethings out of media college.
A couple of gobby students, big deal ! Their problems will be down to the labour party. The conservatives need to save the country just like they did in the early 80s. Funny enough just after another disastrous labour government. As for Clegg and his personality another big deal ! Comical policies made up drunk in his dads chateaux in frog land. I think its about time the daily echo got some senior reporters and stopped relying on spotty 20 somethings out of media college. Red&White Power
  • Score: 0

4:13pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor
I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder.

Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth?
golden rule in life that you fail to apply in life. to know where your going to, you need to know where you been. so you can learn by it.
and if the religious lot had there way we would still be living in the dark ages, and would still be forcing the idea on people in believing in a flat world. this is not my world plus i am an atheist whitch makes for true free thinking, i am to much of a free thinker.
and if there is WW3 it be down the right wing that will start it and not the left. wars are a right wing ideals, free thinking starts when you move away from any thing that is right wing and religion is one off them.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor[/p][/quote]I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder. Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth?[/p][/quote]golden rule in life that you fail to apply in life. to know where your going to, you need to know where you been. so you can learn by it. and if the religious lot had there way we would still be living in the dark ages, and would still be forcing the idea on people in believing in a flat world. this is not my world plus i am an atheist whitch makes for true free thinking, i am to much of a free thinker. and if there is WW3 it be down the right wing that will start it and not the left. wars are a right wing ideals, free thinking starts when you move away from any thing that is right wing and religion is one off them. southy
  • Score: 0

4:17pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have?

Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.[/p][/quote]Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have? Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
Condor Man wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor
I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder. Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth?
golden rule in life that you fail to apply in life. to know where your going to, you need to know where you been. so you can learn by it. and if the religious lot had there way we would still be living in the dark ages, and would still be forcing the idea on people in believing in a flat world. this is not my world plus i am an atheist whitch makes for true free thinking, i am to much of a free thinker. and if there is WW3 it be down the right wing that will start it and not the left. wars are a right wing ideals, free thinking starts when you move away from any thing that is right wing and religion is one off them.
OK. So we are safe from North Korea? And Russia never invaded Afghanistan? Or oppressed all the countries in the Soviet Bloc?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor[/p][/quote]I bet nothing ever written by a RIGHT-handed person is worth the paper it was written on. Was King John right-handed? I wonder. Thank God/spacemen that not everybody is as closed minded as southy, we would be in world war three by now. In his world (lets call it southypark) only black and white exist and unfortunately somewhere along the line someone has indoctrinated him to believe that black is white. Southy you no longer have to take up your valuable time replying to posts on the Echo site as we all know what you are going to say before you do. Education is supposed to help stimulate an enquiring and questioning mind, not one that can just recall falsehoods that they have been told are true. Just because YOU believe something does not make it correct. Or am I wrong and in fact the world is flat and the sun goes around the Earth?[/p][/quote]golden rule in life that you fail to apply in life. to know where your going to, you need to know where you been. so you can learn by it. and if the religious lot had there way we would still be living in the dark ages, and would still be forcing the idea on people in believing in a flat world. this is not my world plus i am an atheist whitch makes for true free thinking, i am to much of a free thinker. and if there is WW3 it be down the right wing that will start it and not the left. wars are a right wing ideals, free thinking starts when you move away from any thing that is right wing and religion is one off them.[/p][/quote]OK. So we are safe from North Korea? And Russia never invaded Afghanistan? Or oppressed all the countries in the Soviet Bloc? Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

4:24pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979.

Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation.

All Communist invasions of other countries.
Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979. Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation. All Communist invasions of other countries. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Friarscliff says...

Students are entitled to express their opinions as well as anyone else.Unfortunately, when many of them do so, as on this occasion, they merely demonstrate for me how narrow is their thinking and that they are simply children of the modern thinking that the state (ie. the hard working tax payer) should continue to provide them with everything they want without any cost to themselves. When this doesn't happen, they have another childish 'paddy'.
No wonder employers in the real world despair of the graduates coming out of universities these days.
Students are entitled to express their opinions as well as anyone else.Unfortunately, when many of them do so, as on this occasion, they merely demonstrate for me how narrow is their thinking and that they are simply children of the modern thinking that the state (ie. the hard working tax payer) should continue to provide them with everything they want without any cost to themselves. When this doesn't happen, they have another childish 'paddy'. No wonder employers in the real world despair of the graduates coming out of universities these days. Friarscliff
  • Score: 0

4:35pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have?

Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies.
inflation was in single figures though out the 70's, it was in the 80's when it pass into double figures. i dont know if you old enough to remember, but maggie thatcher went in a shop M&S i believe in 1979 just before the election for a party political trick, bought 10 basic items for £5 and getting some change back, the same items that would only cost a £1 in 1968, by the end of off 1983 you could only buy 3 of those items for a £5 and have no change back it cost you just over the £5 for those 3 items. and this was at a time when most people wages was staying has there where or they was going down, and people bills was increasing. remember the poll tax this push inflation even higher.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.[/p][/quote]Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have? Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies.[/p][/quote]inflation was in single figures though out the 70's, it was in the 80's when it pass into double figures. i dont know if you old enough to remember, but maggie thatcher went in a shop M&S i believe in 1979 just before the election for a party political trick, bought 10 basic items for £5 and getting some change back, the same items that would only cost a £1 in 1968, by the end of off 1983 you could only buy 3 of those items for a £5 and have no change back it cost you just over the £5 for those 3 items. and this was at a time when most people wages was staying has there where or they was going down, and people bills was increasing. remember the poll tax this push inflation even higher. southy
  • Score: 0

4:41pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have?

Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies.
inflation was in single figures though out the 70's, it was in the 80's when it pass into double figures. i dont know if you old enough to remember, but maggie thatcher went in a shop M&S i believe in 1979 just before the election for a party political trick, bought 10 basic items for £5 and getting some change back, the same items that would only cost a £1 in 1968, by the end of off 1983 you could only buy 3 of those items for a £5 and have no change back it cost you just over the £5 for those 3 items. and this was at a time when most people wages was staying has there where or they was going down, and people bills was increasing. remember the poll tax this push inflation even higher.
I give up.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.[/p][/quote]Question, how do you generate the wealth to pay for all these rights we have? Check your satistics regarding inflation it was far higher under the Labour Government in the mid to late Seventies.[/p][/quote]inflation was in single figures though out the 70's, it was in the 80's when it pass into double figures. i dont know if you old enough to remember, but maggie thatcher went in a shop M&S i believe in 1979 just before the election for a party political trick, bought 10 basic items for £5 and getting some change back, the same items that would only cost a £1 in 1968, by the end of off 1983 you could only buy 3 of those items for a £5 and have no change back it cost you just over the £5 for those 3 items. and this was at a time when most people wages was staying has there where or they was going down, and people bills was increasing. remember the poll tax this push inflation even higher.[/p][/quote]I give up. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

4:42pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

And the average for the seventies was 13%. I think you will find that is double figures for 10 whole years.

Do your research before writing.

The basis of any good education is hard work
And the average for the seventies was 13%. I think you will find that is double figures for 10 whole years. Do your research before writing. The basis of any good education is hard work sound ranger
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

I don't think it was Maggie who had to go to the IMF for a $4billion loan in 1976. Yes, Inflation was high in 1976, and came down sharply after she won in 1979.

Once again southy, you need to check your facts.
I don't think it was Maggie who had to go to the IMF for a $4billion loan in 1976. Yes, Inflation was high in 1976, and came down sharply after she won in 1979. Once again southy, you need to check your facts. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

4:49pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

I'm waiting southy
I'm waiting southy sound ranger
  • Score: 0

4:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Stubs says...

Labour have done a reasonable job of running the country compared to that Torry goverment we had before. One things for sure i'm not voting for those blue muppets.
Labour have done a reasonable job of running the country compared to that Torry goverment we had before. One things for sure i'm not voting for those blue muppets. Stubs
  • Score: 0

5:01pm Mon 26 Apr 10

St Retford says...

Southy makes some pretty bold assertions but his basic premise that Tories are bad is fair enough. If call-me-Dave wins they will joyfully slash services to the needy and it will be four years of misery for anyone that works in or depends on the public sector, and that includes education. People think things can't get any worse than they are, but they really can.
Southy makes some pretty bold assertions but his basic premise that Tories are bad is fair enough. If call-me-Dave wins they will joyfully slash services to the needy and it will be four years of misery for anyone that works in or depends on the public sector, and that includes education. People think things can't get any worse than they are, but they really can. St Retford
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

None of the Political leaders are telling the truth, if they did we wouldn't vote for them.
Two things will happen under the next Government no matter who they are, taxes will go up and spending will go down. Its going to get worse for many people.
None of the Political leaders are telling the truth, if they did we wouldn't vote for them. Two things will happen under the next Government no matter who they are, taxes will go up and spending will go down. Its going to get worse for many people. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

5:09pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

St Retford wrote:
Southy makes some pretty bold assertions but his basic premise that Tories are bad is fair enough. If call-me-Dave wins they will joyfully slash services to the needy and it will be four years of misery for anyone that works in or depends on the public sector, and that includes education. People think things can't get any worse than they are, but they really can.
But we NEED to slash public services. How else are we going to make any inroads into the massive budget deficit? Yes, they can get worse - we could vote Labour in for another five years.
[quote][p][bold]St Retford[/bold] wrote: Southy makes some pretty bold assertions but his basic premise that Tories are bad is fair enough. If call-me-Dave wins they will joyfully slash services to the needy and it will be four years of misery for anyone that works in or depends on the public sector, and that includes education. People think things can't get any worse than they are, but they really can.[/p][/quote]But we NEED to slash public services. How else are we going to make any inroads into the massive budget deficit? Yes, they can get worse - we could vote Labour in for another five years. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Redback says...

southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote:
Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one.
and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
Don't forget that it was also Th*tcher that started us on this wave of free market capitalism (remember 'enterprise'?) that's eventually resulted in the sorry state we're in now. Disgusting woman.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.[/p][/quote]Don't forget that it was also Th*tcher that started us on this wave of free market capitalism (remember 'enterprise'?) that's eventually resulted in the sorry state we're in now. Disgusting woman. Redback
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Linesman says...

Redback wrote:
southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Redback wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.
If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.
that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.
Don't forget that it was also Th*tcher that started us on this wave of free market capitalism (remember 'enterprise'?) that's eventually resulted in the sorry state we're in now. Disgusting woman.
But Dave has got his priorities right!
To hell with helping the less well-of with education, his first aim will be to revoke the ban on fox hunting!
He has to look after his own group!
[quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: Vote Cameron, Get Thatcher.[/p][/quote]If only that were true, I'm sure he'd get a lot more votes. Sadly, he is nowhere near Maggie. She is really the only person who could get us out of the hole we are in, and get us back to the front of the world stage.[/p][/quote]that she did by taken us back wards back to the 1920's, she cause more human suffering since the WW2, the highest unemployment figures ever, high interrest rates, inflation that went into double figures for the first time since the 20's, more poverty more homeless higher crime rate do i need to carry on with that list its a very long one. and we was at the front of the world stage before she came into power any way, but it was for the better reasons and not for the wrong reasons.[/p][/quote]Don't forget that it was also Th*tcher that started us on this wave of free market capitalism (remember 'enterprise'?) that's eventually resulted in the sorry state we're in now. Disgusting woman.[/p][/quote]But Dave has got his priorities right! To hell with helping the less well-of with education, his first aim will be to revoke the ban on fox hunting! He has to look after his own group! Linesman
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979.

Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation.

All Communist invasions of other countries.
the only people who done any invasion of korea was the was the western world, korea was changing its political view in life, western world on the say so of the usa went into korea to stop that change from happening, (a country can not invade it self). real reason was because of korea off shore oil. it was the same reason for vietnam off shore oil, cambodia was invaded by vietnam to stop the mass genocide being committed by a government that the usa supported and kept there, a government that gain control after the usa bomb the government buildings and killing off most of government.
the truth of it all when you get down to the nitty gritty of thing was russia a communist country, most historians believe now it stop being a communist country when lenin died, and capitalism took over. now that russia has open up to the world we are finding the real stuff out and not the false political propaganda that has been put around for the last 70 years.
like whats happening in afghanstan now who invading there now and why. the reason why is not the real reason afghanstan is the gateway country to the oil fields on the asia and europe boundrys.
hungary and czechoslvakia you need to go back to near the end of WW2 and the agreement that was made. whitch would only come to an end with the death of a prisoner in spandau prison whitch give the russians there due here they kept to that agreement and with draw from all occupied territories on the death of that prisoner, but it also brought the end to russia has we knew it
tibet is part of china has been for very high number of years.
dont get mix up like you are a bit there a country can not invade it self.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979. Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation. All Communist invasions of other countries.[/p][/quote]the only people who done any invasion of korea was the was the western world, korea was changing its political view in life, western world on the say so of the usa went into korea to stop that change from happening, (a country can not invade it self). real reason was because of korea off shore oil. it was the same reason for vietnam off shore oil, cambodia was invaded by vietnam to stop the mass genocide being committed by a government that the usa supported and kept there, a government that gain control after the usa bomb the government buildings and killing off most of government. the truth of it all when you get down to the nitty gritty of thing was russia a communist country, most historians believe now it stop being a communist country when lenin died, and capitalism took over. now that russia has open up to the world we are finding the real stuff out and not the false political propaganda that has been put around for the last 70 years. like whats happening in afghanstan now who invading there now and why. the reason why is not the real reason afghanstan is the gateway country to the oil fields on the asia and europe boundrys. hungary and czechoslvakia you need to go back to near the end of WW2 and the agreement that was made. whitch would only come to an end with the death of a prisoner in spandau prison whitch give the russians there due here they kept to that agreement and with draw from all occupied territories on the death of that prisoner, but it also brought the end to russia has we knew it tibet is part of china has been for very high number of years. dont get mix up like you are a bit there a country can not invade it self. southy
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Mon 26 Apr 10

bravebeth says...

Absolutely appalling, why did he not meet with the residents of Southampton? I expect it was Jeremy Moultons idea.Why are students considered more important than the residents? Students should not be voting in Southampton - they should vote in their home cities. They do not pay council tax yet use all the facilities. Millions are spent on students and for what - they are not producing leaders at Southampton University.
Absolutely appalling, why did he not meet with the residents of Southampton? I expect it was Jeremy Moultons idea.Why are students considered more important than the residents? Students should not be voting in Southampton - they should vote in their home cities. They do not pay council tax yet use all the facilities. Millions are spent on students and for what - they are not producing leaders at Southampton University. bravebeth
  • Score: 0

5:24pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
And the average for the seventies was 13%. I think you will find that is double figures for 10 whole years.

Do your research before writing.

The basis of any good education is hard work
do your research inflation in the 70's was a max of 7% to 8%, banks was charging an higher interest rate on borrowing whitch is not inflation. under thatcher it went into twice that amount. true inflation is the gap between wages and buying basic goods
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: And the average for the seventies was 13%. I think you will find that is double figures for 10 whole years. Do your research before writing. The basis of any good education is hard work[/p][/quote]do your research inflation in the 70's was a max of 7% to 8%, banks was charging an higher interest rate on borrowing whitch is not inflation. under thatcher it went into twice that amount. true inflation is the gap between wages and buying basic goods southy
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Facewagon says...

bravebeth wrote:
Absolutely appalling, why did he not meet with the residents of Southampton? I expect it was Jeremy Moultons idea.Why are students considered more important than the residents? Students should not be voting in Southampton - they should vote in their home cities. They do not pay council tax yet use all the facilities. Millions are spent on students and for what - they are not producing leaders at Southampton University.
This visit isn't purely about voting in Southampton though, is it. After all, Dave isn't standing in Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]bravebeth[/bold] wrote: Absolutely appalling, why did he not meet with the residents of Southampton? I expect it was Jeremy Moultons idea.Why are students considered more important than the residents? Students should not be voting in Southampton - they should vote in their home cities. They do not pay council tax yet use all the facilities. Millions are spent on students and for what - they are not producing leaders at Southampton University.[/p][/quote]This visit isn't purely about voting in Southampton though, is it. After all, Dave isn't standing in Southampton. Facewagon
  • Score: 0

5:28pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
I don't think it was Maggie who had to go to the IMF for a $4billion loan in 1976. Yes, Inflation was high in 1976, and came down sharply after she won in 1979.

Once again southy, you need to check your facts.
no maggie went to the usa and borrowed money against our WW2 loan at a higher interest rate than what she would have got from the imf, she hid it like many other things she done. check your facts
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: I don't think it was Maggie who had to go to the IMF for a $4billion loan in 1976. Yes, Inflation was high in 1976, and came down sharply after she won in 1979. Once again southy, you need to check your facts.[/p][/quote]no maggie went to the usa and borrowed money against our WW2 loan at a higher interest rate than what she would have got from the imf, she hid it like many other things she done. check your facts southy
  • Score: 0

5:39pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Lone Ranger says...

Its great that Cameron makes such an impact on Southampton.....a few hand shakes at the Uni....couple of difficult questions.......well they are when you dont know the answers......did our local Tory candidates meet him........would have thought the Echo would have published pictures by know if they did.
.
Mind you they are not that important...so off he goes to Romsey.......bit easier that one for the Airbrush boy........most of them want fox hunting back so he will be warmly welcomed.
.
Out of his depth by absolute miles along with the Clegg boy.
.
Both of them are a wolf in shheps clothing.
.
Dont forget Tory boy wants you vote but he does not want you.......they are desperate and will promise you the world.
.
The only ones to get anything will be the ones who supported him on the 1% tax and the rich
Its great that Cameron makes such an impact on Southampton.....a few hand shakes at the Uni....couple of difficult questions.......well they are when you dont know the answers......did our local Tory candidates meet him........would have thought the Echo would have published pictures by know if they did. . Mind you they are not that important...so off he goes to Romsey.......bit easier that one for the Airbrush boy........most of them want fox hunting back so he will be warmly welcomed. . Out of his depth by absolute miles along with the Clegg boy. . Both of them are a wolf in shheps clothing. . Dont forget Tory boy wants you vote but he does not want you.......they are desperate and will promise you the world. . The only ones to get anything will be the ones who supported him on the 1% tax and the rich Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

5:39pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
None of the Political leaders are telling the truth, if they did we wouldn't vote for them.
Two things will happen under the next Government no matter who they are, taxes will go up and spending will go down. Its going to get worse for many people.
now here some thing i will agree on they are all bad has one another, all in it for there own pockets, and the partys that could have power because they standing in enough seats to gain power if they are lucky are all right wing politics it has been that way now for 30 years, just that you have got the lesser of the evils and that is labour. dont give you a lot of choice do it, let me see what i have i got to chose from right wing and more right wing and more right wing.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: None of the Political leaders are telling the truth, if they did we wouldn't vote for them. Two things will happen under the next Government no matter who they are, taxes will go up and spending will go down. Its going to get worse for many people.[/p][/quote]now here some thing i will agree on they are all bad has one another, all in it for there own pockets, and the partys that could have power because they standing in enough seats to gain power if they are lucky are all right wing politics it has been that way now for 30 years, just that you have got the lesser of the evils and that is labour. dont give you a lot of choice do it, let me see what i have i got to chose from right wing and more right wing and more right wing. southy
  • Score: 0

5:44pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Gladbachsaint says...

That was a shock. I never imagined for a minute that a politician would visit a University and be gobbed off at by a mouthy (undecided left/right wing/lib-dem/green vegetarian party etc etc) student !!! Heavens whatever next ????
That was a shock. I never imagined for a minute that a politician would visit a University and be gobbed off at by a mouthy (undecided left/right wing/lib-dem/green vegetarian party etc etc) student !!! Heavens whatever next ???? Gladbachsaint
  • Score: 0

5:54pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979.

Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation.

All Communist invasions of other countries.
the only people who done any invasion of korea was the was the western world, korea was changing its political view in life, western world on the say so of the usa went into korea to stop that change from happening, (a country can not invade it self). real reason was because of korea off shore oil. it was the same reason for vietnam off shore oil, cambodia was invaded by vietnam to stop the mass genocide being committed by a government that the usa supported and kept there, a government that gain control after the usa bomb the government buildings and killing off most of government.
the truth of it all when you get down to the nitty gritty of thing was russia a communist country, most historians believe now it stop being a communist country when lenin died, and capitalism took over. now that russia has open up to the world we are finding the real stuff out and not the false political propaganda that has been put around for the last 70 years.
like whats happening in afghanstan now who invading there now and why. the reason why is not the real reason afghanstan is the gateway country to the oil fields on the asia and europe boundrys.
hungary and czechoslvakia you need to go back to near the end of WW2 and the agreement that was made. whitch would only come to an end with the death of a prisoner in spandau prison whitch give the russians there due here they kept to that agreement and with draw from all occupied territories on the death of that prisoner, but it also brought the end to russia has we knew it
tibet is part of china has been for very high number of years.
dont get mix up like you are a bit there a country can not invade it self.
Would you care to tell The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people that?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Korea 1950, Hungary 1956, Tibet 1961, Vietnam 1962, Czechosolvakia 1968, Afghanistan 1978. Cambodia 1978, Vietnam 1979. Then they began to run out of money due to lack of wealth creation. All Communist invasions of other countries.[/p][/quote]the only people who done any invasion of korea was the was the western world, korea was changing its political view in life, western world on the say so of the usa went into korea to stop that change from happening, (a country can not invade it self). real reason was because of korea off shore oil. it was the same reason for vietnam off shore oil, cambodia was invaded by vietnam to stop the mass genocide being committed by a government that the usa supported and kept there, a government that gain control after the usa bomb the government buildings and killing off most of government. the truth of it all when you get down to the nitty gritty of thing was russia a communist country, most historians believe now it stop being a communist country when lenin died, and capitalism took over. now that russia has open up to the world we are finding the real stuff out and not the false political propaganda that has been put around for the last 70 years. like whats happening in afghanstan now who invading there now and why. the reason why is not the real reason afghanstan is the gateway country to the oil fields on the asia and europe boundrys. hungary and czechoslvakia you need to go back to near the end of WW2 and the agreement that was made. whitch would only come to an end with the death of a prisoner in spandau prison whitch give the russians there due here they kept to that agreement and with draw from all occupied territories on the death of that prisoner, but it also brought the end to russia has we knew it tibet is part of china has been for very high number of years. dont get mix up like you are a bit there a country can not invade it self.[/p][/quote]Would you care to tell The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people that? v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others sound ranger
  • Score: 0

5:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

13% that is, not 135
13% that is, not 135 sound ranger
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Mon 26 Apr 10

devdor12 says...

Someone call clegg quick! I just heard the best liberal stump speech delivered in romsey and it was Cameron!!! What the hell ever happened to conservative values?! Pro-eu, climate change garbage. Coalition gov't here we come yahoo!!!
Someone call clegg quick! I just heard the best liberal stump speech delivered in romsey and it was Cameron!!! What the hell ever happened to conservative values?! Pro-eu, climate change garbage. Coalition gov't here we come yahoo!!! devdor12
  • Score: 0

5:59pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Brite Spark says...

Condor Man wrote:
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
If instead of Neville Chamberlain being Prime Minister it had been a Labour government when Southy was taking his 11+, he would be far more highly educated in the art of the English language.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]If instead of Neville Chamberlain being Prime Minister it had been a Labour government when Southy was taking his 11+, he would be far more highly educated in the art of the English language. Brite Spark
  • Score: 0

6:05pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Lone Ranger wrote:
Its great that Cameron makes such an impact on Southampton.....a few hand shakes at the Uni....couple of difficult questions.......well they are when you dont know the answers......did our local Tory candidates meet him........would have thought the Echo would have published pictures by know if they did.
.
Mind you they are not that important...so off he goes to Romsey.......bit easier that one for the Airbrush boy........most of them want fox hunting back so he will be warmly welcomed.
.
Out of his depth by absolute miles along with the Clegg boy.
.
Both of them are a wolf in shheps clothing.
.
Dont forget Tory boy wants you vote but he does not want you.......they are desperate and will promise you the world.
.
The only ones to get anything will be the ones who supported him on the 1% tax and the rich
the truth in reality lone, is that the torys are in death dance, some thing is just starting that should of started in 1945. but the liberals took there place in stead, and this was all due to what the liberal leader done just before the start of WW2, remember your history lessons peace with in our time. he failed to read hitler for what he was, and this cost the liberals for 60 years off taken a back bench in politics. but it looks like the tables are turning at long last, the torys are falling to where they really belong a third place party, with the liberals moving up a place into second spot, and a labour first that is till the new left wing party can stand people in every seat. its going to be intersting in the next few general elections, has more and more right wing voters start to switch to the liberals, has they begin to learn that all those years the torys have been spreading that rumour about, that a vote for the liberals is a wasted vote, when it in reality it is the other way round, a vote for the torys is a wasted vote because they are to far to the right and boarders on the edge of extreme right.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger[/bold] wrote: Its great that Cameron makes such an impact on Southampton.....a few hand shakes at the Uni....couple of difficult questions.......well they are when you dont know the answers......did our local Tory candidates meet him........would have thought the Echo would have published pictures by know if they did. . Mind you they are not that important...so off he goes to Romsey.......bit easier that one for the Airbrush boy........most of them want fox hunting back so he will be warmly welcomed. . Out of his depth by absolute miles along with the Clegg boy. . Both of them are a wolf in shheps clothing. . Dont forget Tory boy wants you vote but he does not want you.......they are desperate and will promise you the world. . The only ones to get anything will be the ones who supported him on the 1% tax and the rich[/p][/quote]the truth in reality lone, is that the torys are in death dance, some thing is just starting that should of started in 1945. but the liberals took there place in stead, and this was all due to what the liberal leader done just before the start of WW2, remember your history lessons peace with in our time. he failed to read hitler for what he was, and this cost the liberals for 60 years off taken a back bench in politics. but it looks like the tables are turning at long last, the torys are falling to where they really belong a third place party, with the liberals moving up a place into second spot, and a labour first that is till the new left wing party can stand people in every seat. its going to be intersting in the next few general elections, has more and more right wing voters start to switch to the liberals, has they begin to learn that all those years the torys have been spreading that rumour about, that a vote for the liberals is a wasted vote, when it in reality it is the other way round, a vote for the torys is a wasted vote because they are to far to the right and boarders on the edge of extreme right. southy
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Mon 26 Apr 10

allsaintsnocurves says...

I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are!

Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic.

He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one...

How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too!
I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are! Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic. He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one... How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too! allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

I do hope good ol boy southy doesn't do anything rash when the peoples republic of Millbrook loose their deposit in a few days time. Up the peoples popular front-------right up em.
I do hope good ol boy southy doesn't do anything rash when the peoples republic of Millbrook loose their deposit in a few days time. Up the peoples popular front-------right up em. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

6:18pm Mon 26 Apr 10

My View from the Hill says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,
Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?
Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege.

The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School.

Can you say the same about David Cameron?
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,[/p][/quote]Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?[/p][/quote]Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege. The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School. Can you say the same about David Cameron? My View from the Hill
  • Score: 0

6:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

freefinker says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
I do hope good ol boy southy doesn't do anything rash when the peoples republic of Millbrook loose their deposit in a few days time. Up the peoples popular front-------right up em.
Popular peoples Front, surely.
.. that other lot are splitters.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: I do hope good ol boy southy doesn't do anything rash when the peoples republic of Millbrook loose their deposit in a few days time. Up the peoples popular front-------right up em.[/p][/quote]Popular peoples Front, surely. .. that other lot are splitters. freefinker
  • Score: 0

6:24pm Mon 26 Apr 10

My View from the Hill says...

allsaintsnocurves wrote:
I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are!

Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic.

He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one...

How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too!
How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...!

Simple answer, smaller class sizes in primary schools, remember the 35 plus pupils per class, which was the norm under any Tory government
[quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are! Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic. He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one... How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too![/p][/quote]How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Simple answer, smaller class sizes in primary schools, remember the 35 plus pupils per class, which was the norm under any Tory government My View from the Hill
  • Score: 0

6:34pm Mon 26 Apr 10

allsaintsnocurves says...

My View from the Hill wrote:
allsaintsnocurves wrote: I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are! Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic. He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one... How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too!
How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Simple answer, smaller class sizes in primary schools, remember the 35 plus pupils per class, which was the norm under any Tory government
so the school closures are a good thing then? This will be easy to get the smaller class sizes! Lets go back more than a decade and see that clearly the Tories don't want smaller class sizes...no in fact that's in the manifesto...yeah under the heading...make school's class sizes much bigger! Why don't you stop making up a load of lies...clearly Labour voters are as worried as Labour themselves which is why they feel they need to use scaremongering tactics! People just need to look at the facts...Labour has stung us for more money than any other government with their Stealth taxes...they have wasted all that money...and now we are broke...they want to carry on spending and wasting more money...taxing our businesses who are the only ones who can get us out of this mess! ...But surely...to vote Tory must mean we are going to start bombing Argentina again or lead to street riots! lol...just pre-empting more scare stories...
[quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: I love the speculation on what Cameron would do as soon as he would get into power...all this anti Tory BS...frankly he's not stupid so don't insult his or anyone else's intelligence on who votes for him. The fundamental issues in this country that people feel strongly about are now working as they are at the moment!! Why?? Because Labour have not been successful in securing our future during the strongest boom years. Had the Tories been in power during the last term then we would be so much better off as a country and not facing quite so many hard decisions as we are! Yes spending needs to be controlled and Cameron recognises this and will be the first to stop the wastage we have had under Labour! That will ensure more money goes to the right places without throwing extra money around anyway! It's simple logic. He deserves a chance...that can not be said of Brown as he has had one... How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Maybe if Brown started visiting some places other than his safe seats he might find some objectional people too![/p][/quote]How is education better under Brown with all the schools closures around the country and the introduction of tuition fees...! Simple answer, smaller class sizes in primary schools, remember the 35 plus pupils per class, which was the norm under any Tory government[/p][/quote]so the school closures are a good thing then? This will be easy to get the smaller class sizes! Lets go back more than a decade and see that clearly the Tories don't want smaller class sizes...no in fact that's in the manifesto...yeah under the heading...make school's class sizes much bigger! Why don't you stop making up a load of lies...clearly Labour voters are as worried as Labour themselves which is why they feel they need to use scaremongering tactics! People just need to look at the facts...Labour has stung us for more money than any other government with their Stealth taxes...they have wasted all that money...and now we are broke...they want to carry on spending and wasting more money...taxing our businesses who are the only ones who can get us out of this mess! ...But surely...to vote Tory must mean we are going to start bombing Argentina again or lead to street riots! lol...just pre-empting more scare stories... allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

6:35pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Bronson69 says...

St Retford wrote:
Chloe, you're a hero.

The thought of waking up next Friday with David CaMORON (cheers) as prime minister scares the life out of me.
To-tally agree ,after experiencing the many tory recessions. of the 80 and 90 s it amazes me how anyone can ever consider voting conservative. I remember needing a knee operation in 1994 and being told i would have to wait 22 months ! I needed the same procedure
on my other knee this year and waited 12 weeks , i dont know how many of you have children but i also remember how poor comprehensive schools wrre under the tories mine especially ,now the same school and many more are on a par with good private schools with some of the most gifted children being spotted early and placed into talented and gifted classes. And last but not least anyone fancy 17% interest rates again ?

Im not saying labour are perfect as they are clearly not , all im saying is focus on all labour have undoubtably improved rather than the negatives all the tory newspapers highlight and then ask yourselves who is really best for me and my family . Easy question isnt it ?
[quote][p][bold]St Retford[/bold] wrote: Chloe, you're a hero. The thought of waking up next Friday with David CaMORON (cheers) as prime minister scares the life out of me.[/p][/quote]To-tally agree ,after experiencing the many tory recessions. of the 80 and 90 s it amazes me how anyone can ever consider voting conservative. I remember needing a knee operation in 1994 and being told i would have to wait 22 months ! I needed the same procedure on my other knee this year and waited 12 weeks , i dont know how many of you have children but i also remember how poor comprehensive schools wrre under the tories mine especially ,now the same school and many more are on a par with good private schools with some of the most gifted children being spotted early and placed into talented and gifted classes. And last but not least anyone fancy 17% interest rates again ? Im not saying labour are perfect as they are clearly not , all im saying is focus on all labour have undoubtably improved rather than the negatives all the tory newspapers highlight and then ask yourselves who is really best for me and my family . Easy question isnt it ? Bronson69
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

I'm going to vote Tory because I'm sick to death of Labour. My MP, Alan Whitehead, has shown no interest in the needs of owner-occupiers living in Test. The schools are still bad after 13 years- nice new buildings but still low standards. Taxes have shot up but when I've need state assistance I was only offered £90- with a wife and baby and a mortgage to pay.

Coupled with that, are you happy that people on average wages now can't afford to buy houses (not flats)? Are you happy that petrol is now £1.20 a litre? are you happy Council Tax has doubled in 13 years? are you happy that uni tuition fees are pricing people out of education? the list is endless. If you own your own home and vote anything but Tory on MAy 6th you're slitting your own throat and those of everyone else when interest rates shoot up, the £ is devalued and we end up like Greece by called the IMF in.
I'm going to vote Tory because I'm sick to death of Labour. My MP, Alan Whitehead, has shown no interest in the needs of owner-occupiers living in Test. The schools are still bad after 13 years- nice new buildings but still low standards. Taxes have shot up but when I've need state assistance I was only offered £90- with a wife and baby and a mortgage to pay. Coupled with that, are you happy that people on average wages now can't afford to buy houses (not flats)? Are you happy that petrol is now £1.20 a litre? are you happy Council Tax has doubled in 13 years? are you happy that uni tuition fees are pricing people out of education? the list is endless. If you own your own home and vote anything but Tory on MAy 6th you're slitting your own throat and those of everyone else when interest rates shoot up, the £ is devalued and we end up like Greece by called the IMF in. Condor Man
  • Score: 0

6:48pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

Some may ask what the labour government has done for us since coming to power well I've found out. They have been having meetings to make up new ways of raising money from fines. To this end they have created over three thousand six hundred new laws. They include.
Selling types of flora and fauna not native to the UK, such as the grey squirrel, ruddy duck or Japanese knotweed. To Disturb a pack of eggs when instructed not to by an authorised officer and to Offer for sale a game bird killed on a Sunday or Christmas Day. Ah the social freedom brought to you by a socialist government.
Some may ask what the labour government has done for us since coming to power well I've found out. They have been having meetings to make up new ways of raising money from fines. To this end they have created over three thousand six hundred new laws. They include. Selling types of flora and fauna not native to the UK, such as the grey squirrel, ruddy duck or Japanese knotweed. To Disturb a pack of eggs when instructed not to by an authorised officer and to Offer for sale a game bird killed on a Sunday or Christmas Day. Ah the social freedom brought to you by a socialist government. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

6:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia southy
  • Score: 0

7:02pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

7:19pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,
Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?
Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege.

The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School.

Can you say the same about David Cameron?
We all know where DC was educated. But why should that be an issue? I can list all the members of the Labour Cabinet who had private education if you want me to, but to be honest a good education is not something to be criticised, it is something to be celebrated. This election is about what you think the candidate will do for you, not what their background is.

By the way, neither Margaret Thatcher nor John Major had a privileged background. They both knew what it meant to work hard to achieve your goals.
[quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,[/p][/quote]Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?[/p][/quote]Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege. The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School. Can you say the same about David Cameron?[/p][/quote]We all know where DC was educated. But why should that be an issue? I can list all the members of the Labour Cabinet who had private education if you want me to, but to be honest a good education is not something to be criticised, it is something to be celebrated. This election is about what you think the candidate will do for you, not what their background is. By the way, neither Margaret Thatcher nor John Major had a privileged background. They both knew what it meant to work hard to achieve your goals. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

7:25pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
My View from the Hill wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,
Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?
Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege.

The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School.

Can you say the same about David Cameron?
We all know where DC was educated. But why should that be an issue? I can list all the members of the Labour Cabinet who had private education if you want me to, but to be honest a good education is not something to be criticised, it is something to be celebrated. This election is about what you think the candidate will do for you, not what their background is.

By the way, neither Margaret Thatcher nor John Major had a privileged background. They both knew what it meant to work hard to achieve your goals.
Ted Heath wasn't from a 'typical' Tory background either. No one worked harder than John Major to pull themselves up from nothing- compare that to that arrogant Kinnock who never did a proper days work after leaving University. Clegg is just as posh as Cameron- as it Huhne for that matter. Denham and Whitehead also had more priviledged backgrounds than Smith and Moulton so they are hardly 'men of the people'.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]My View from the Hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]Well said that man, I too think David Cameron should take your advice, he should not hide behind his privileged background and should stop complaining about Labour and should get a real job,[/p][/quote]Just been doing some research. Tony Blair, Alastair Darling and Ed Balls all went to private schools, as did Nick Clegg. Do you really want to debate privilege?[/p][/quote]Oh yes Mr Ellis debate privilege. The leader of the Labour party, was educated in state school, before going being fast tracked to Edinburgh University, due to his intelligence, not the size of his parents bank account, he worked his up from Kirkcaldy High School. Can you say the same about David Cameron?[/p][/quote]We all know where DC was educated. But why should that be an issue? I can list all the members of the Labour Cabinet who had private education if you want me to, but to be honest a good education is not something to be criticised, it is something to be celebrated. This election is about what you think the candidate will do for you, not what their background is. By the way, neither Margaret Thatcher nor John Major had a privileged background. They both knew what it meant to work hard to achieve your goals.[/p][/quote]Ted Heath wasn't from a 'typical' Tory background either. No one worked harder than John Major to pull themselves up from nothing- compare that to that arrogant Kinnock who never did a proper days work after leaving University. Clegg is just as posh as Cameron- as it Huhne for that matter. Denham and Whitehead also had more priviledged backgrounds than Smith and Moulton so they are hardly 'men of the people'. Condor Man
  • Score: 0

7:36pm Mon 26 Apr 10

warness says...

Who is this Mrellis?

Margaret Thatcher is a gangland criminal, whose family have made millions by under-the-counter dealings.
dennis with shares, son mark with African lives.

Stop dreaming maggyboy, she hates all of us
Who is this Mrellis? Margaret Thatcher is a gangland criminal, whose family have made millions by under-the-counter dealings. dennis with shares, son mark with African lives. Stop dreaming maggyboy, she hates all of us warness
  • Score: 0

7:42pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Boutros Boutros Ghali says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile. Boutros Boutros Ghali
  • Score: 0

7:51pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time.
cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time. cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them. southy
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Indigo899 says...

Check out this woman heckling Cameron in Romsey about Tory education cuts. Fair play to her!

http://www.facebook.
com/#!/pages/The-scr
eaming-Cameron-heckl
er/114228458609854
Check out this woman heckling Cameron in Romsey about Tory education cuts. Fair play to her! http://www.facebook. com/#!/pages/The-scr eaming-Cameron-heckl er/114228458609854 Indigo899
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Bartonian says...

southy wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.
What a load of rubbish!

Education has been taken over by the liberal left, who have given us bog standard comprehensives and over inflated A level results. Higher education is a complete waste of time most of the time, for the students who study for irrelevant courses beyond their capability and for the taxpayer whohelp to fund them. It has also produced left-wing windbags from Redbridge who cannot put two sentences properly on forums such as this. It is the de-skilling of the workforce that is part of the control of people in a socialist new world order and all of the mainstream political parties and their liberal ideas are in on this.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]education is a right for all, and it dont matter it is further education or not, our parents paid for that right, has it should be us paying for it in the next generation and so forth, the sooner all right wing aka capitalist is stop from blocking this the better, your right wing dont want an educated masses of ordinary people, because they will soon relise what is going on. your right wing wants a dumbing down of ordinary people. it inables them to control the ordinary people a lot better.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish! Education has been taken over by the liberal left, who have given us bog standard comprehensives and over inflated A level results. Higher education is a complete waste of time most of the time, for the students who study for irrelevant courses beyond their capability and for the taxpayer whohelp to fund them. It has also produced left-wing windbags from Redbridge who cannot put two sentences properly on forums such as this. It is the de-skilling of the workforce that is part of the control of people in a socialist new world order and all of the mainstream political parties and their liberal ideas are in on this. Bartonian
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

Dear old southy you have a very disturbed view of the world. You frequently wrong and are unable to tell the truth.

The Bank of England website has a whole section on inflation, it even has pictures to help you. I did put a link up but the Echo removed it, why?

Communism is not the answer, even Hitler called himself a socialist. We live in the global village, we have to produce the right quality goods/services at the right price. If we do not then we as a nation we will fail to fund the society we want.

We need wealth creators who pay their fair share of taxation.
Dear old southy you have a very disturbed view of the world. You frequently wrong and are unable to tell the truth. The Bank of England website has a whole section on inflation, it even has pictures to help you. I did put a link up but the Echo removed it, why? Communism is not the answer, even Hitler called himself a socialist. We live in the global village, we have to produce the right quality goods/services at the right price. If we do not then we as a nation we will fail to fund the society we want. We need wealth creators who pay their fair share of taxation. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

8:03pm Mon 26 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
Cambodia?

Sihanouk to 1970
Lon Nol 1970-75
Pol Pot 1975 to 1978

Southy get facts right, its one thing having an opinion but your knowledge is very poor.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]Cambodia? Sihanouk to 1970 Lon Nol 1970-75 Pol Pot 1975 to 1978 Southy get facts right, its one thing having an opinion but your knowledge is very poor. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

8:40pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
Dear old southy you have a very disturbed view of the world. You frequently wrong and are unable to tell the truth.

The Bank of England website has a whole section on inflation, it even has pictures to help you. I did put a link up but the Echo removed it, why?

Communism is not the answer, even Hitler called himself a socialist. We live in the global village, we have to produce the right quality goods/services at the right price. If we do not then we as a nation we will fail to fund the society we want.

We need wealth creators who pay their fair share of taxation.
read some of jame's burke books, i know he an science and technology historian and about the best there is, but he go's into great detail on how things happen and the condition why it happen, he do talk about what was happening in the 60's 70's 80's 90's and what was the back ground in why things happened. he talks about inflation all though the 4 decades in a subject why do a lot of people have pc now days. its all important stuff to figure out why today is like today and he gives you cross ref to check up for your self. so you can decide for your self.

echo removes all links if they see them, part of the echo rules is no links.

hilter may of called him self a socialist but he was't, he was a capitalist a nationlist, he used the name and a lie to get into power, he used the working class backs to get to the top. the clue was in the party name, :- nationalist (the national socialist party) he was an extreme right wing, a fascist and has any one knows that is about extreme right wing you can get. communisum is ment to be extreme left wing, i not in favour of that to. the trouble with communisum is that it dont check on the people who are going to take over, hence what happen in russia on the death of lenin, i sure winston churchill knew what staling was and that was another nationlist a fascist a extreme right wing and not a communist, and after the collapse of russia and there doors opening up we are now finding out this was the case. there still a lot more to learn about russia and the truth and not that false propaganda that was put about by the capitalist.

if you want to see this global village then the answer is socialism, its the only policy that will not rip people off and work with other countrys with out invading them.
there is loads of countrys that are changing and changing to wards socialism.
true wealth is knowledge not money. what the world should be doing is getting the knowledge off every thing we need and to produce and share it out to every one, the real need is not to run out, if we run out like its going to we will not get on this rock of a planet and with not leaving this rock we will become extinct.
theres a hell of lot more to it and it will take more than this forum to even explain a little bit
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Dear old southy you have a very disturbed view of the world. You frequently wrong and are unable to tell the truth. The Bank of England website has a whole section on inflation, it even has pictures to help you. I did put a link up but the Echo removed it, why? Communism is not the answer, even Hitler called himself a socialist. We live in the global village, we have to produce the right quality goods/services at the right price. If we do not then we as a nation we will fail to fund the society we want. We need wealth creators who pay their fair share of taxation.[/p][/quote]read some of jame's burke books, i know he an science and technology historian and about the best there is, but he go's into great detail on how things happen and the condition why it happen, he do talk about what was happening in the 60's 70's 80's 90's and what was the back ground in why things happened. he talks about inflation all though the 4 decades in a subject why do a lot of people have pc now days. its all important stuff to figure out why today is like today and he gives you cross ref to check up for your self. so you can decide for your self. echo removes all links if they see them, part of the echo rules is no links. hilter may of called him self a socialist but he was't, he was a capitalist a nationlist, he used the name and a lie to get into power, he used the working class backs to get to the top. the clue was in the party name, :- nationalist (the national socialist party) he was an extreme right wing, a fascist and has any one knows that is about extreme right wing you can get. communisum is ment to be extreme left wing, i not in favour of that to. the trouble with communisum is that it dont check on the people who are going to take over, hence what happen in russia on the death of lenin, i sure winston churchill knew what staling was and that was another nationlist a fascist a extreme right wing and not a communist, and after the collapse of russia and there doors opening up we are now finding out this was the case. there still a lot more to learn about russia and the truth and not that false propaganda that was put about by the capitalist. if you want to see this global village then the answer is socialism, its the only policy that will not rip people off and work with other countrys with out invading them. there is loads of countrys that are changing and changing to wards socialism. true wealth is knowledge not money. what the world should be doing is getting the knowledge off every thing we need and to produce and share it out to every one, the real need is not to run out, if we run out like its going to we will not get on this rock of a planet and with not leaving this rock we will become extinct. theres a hell of lot more to it and it will take more than this forum to even explain a little bit southy
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Mon 26 Apr 10

The Wickham Man says...

southy wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?
my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor
From your posts here and elsewhere the only other areas you excel in are:-
1) Googling up random facts in a depserate attempt to appear intelligent
2) Worship of Bob Crow as a god.
3) Bullsh*t

What is laughable is that everyone else on here is going to do relatively well in this election compared to you. Your "real socialist" candidates if they even exist are going to poll about as many votes as the BNP and possibly even less, and you are the only person on here so deluded as to not even understand this nor the reason why. Try getting a real education instead of faking it, eh "comrade"?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Southy mouthing off about education is a real joke. He's poor quality grammar shows he took no interest at school. How can someone who can barely communication coherantly have the gall to talk about Tory education policies?[/p][/quote]my english might be bad, but i excell in other areas after all king john could not read or write but but he set down the begings of law, richard branson his english is not perfect but look where it got to day. so that aguement dont work condor[/p][/quote]From your posts here and elsewhere the only other areas you excel in are:- 1) Googling up random facts in a depserate attempt to appear intelligent 2) Worship of Bob Crow as a god. 3) Bullsh*t What is laughable is that everyone else on here is going to do relatively well in this election compared to you. Your "real socialist" candidates if they even exist are going to poll about as many votes as the BNP and possibly even less, and you are the only person on here so deluded as to not even understand this nor the reason why. Try getting a real education instead of faking it, eh "comrade"? The Wickham Man
  • Score: 0

8:48pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time.
cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.
I think the word is Buddhist, that's with an H and Buddhism is not a form of government. Being just two years younger than yourself I think perhaps you may like to come up with another theory about my knowledge of history (plus I've got the exam results to prove I studied it at school) lol.
It was not suggested that Cambodia was interfering in other countries business, in fact they where too busy killing millions of their own people to be doing much else.

Cambodia was under direct or indirect instruction from Beijing. Working on your earlier statement saying that Tibet has been a part of China for so long that it may as well accept it, you could equally say the same for Cambodia.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time. cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.[/p][/quote]I think the word is Buddhist, that's with an H and Buddhism is not a form of government. Being just two years younger than yourself I think perhaps you may like to come up with another theory about my knowledge of history (plus I've got the exam results to prove I studied it at school) lol. It was not suggested that Cambodia was interfering in other countries business, in fact they where too busy killing millions of their own people to be doing much else. Cambodia was under direct or indirect instruction from Beijing. Working on your earlier statement saying that Tibet has been a part of China for so long that it may as well accept it, you could equally say the same for Cambodia. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

8:53pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

I think dear old southy is a biy of a snob you know. Millbrook is not a suburb of Redbridge.
I think dear old southy is a biy of a snob you know. Millbrook is not a suburb of Redbridge. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

8:58pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
Cambodia?

Sihanouk to 1970
Lon Nol 1970-75
Pol Pot 1975 to 1978

Southy get facts right, its one thing having an opinion but your knowledge is very poor.
recheck but dont use the internet to many false propaganda info on the net, cambodia when under pol-pot was supported by the usa, with money and guns. not by china, china supported vietnam, and if china supported cambodia it would of not let communsit vietnam invade cambodia think about it, china would of stop them in there tracks. but because pol-pot cambodia was supported by the usa and no western world was willing to invade cambodia to stop the mass killing going on there because of the usa, communist vietnam did they did not mess about they chase pol-pot and finally cornered him near the boarder in the south west of the country, killing him and most of what was left of his troops only 3 survive after the gun battle in the jungle, found on him was a suit case full of usa dollars usa guns plus other types guns from other parts of the world
this is factual history and not propaganda history that internet seems to be full off.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]Cambodia? Sihanouk to 1970 Lon Nol 1970-75 Pol Pot 1975 to 1978 Southy get facts right, its one thing having an opinion but your knowledge is very poor.[/p][/quote]recheck but dont use the internet to many false propaganda info on the net, cambodia when under pol-pot was supported by the usa, with money and guns. not by china, china supported vietnam, and if china supported cambodia it would of not let communsit vietnam invade cambodia think about it, china would of stop them in there tracks. but because pol-pot cambodia was supported by the usa and no western world was willing to invade cambodia to stop the mass killing going on there because of the usa, communist vietnam did they did not mess about they chase pol-pot and finally cornered him near the boarder in the south west of the country, killing him and most of what was left of his troops only 3 survive after the gun battle in the jungle, found on him was a suit case full of usa dollars usa guns plus other types guns from other parts of the world this is factual history and not propaganda history that internet seems to be full off. southy
  • Score: 0

8:59pm Mon 26 Apr 10

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time.
cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.
southy, Pol Pot died 15 April 1998.
Vietnam invaded in November 1978.
.
So, do you wish to revise your statement "the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him"?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time. cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.[/p][/quote]southy, Pol Pot died 15 April 1998. Vietnam invaded in November 1978. . So, do you wish to revise your statement "the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him"? freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.
Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.
[quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.[/p][/quote]Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

9:47pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
Check out the Bank of England website.
Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies.

North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others
the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation.
good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys.
there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in.

north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia
Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.
no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time.
cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.
southy, Pol Pot died 15 April 1998.
Vietnam invaded in November 1978.
.
So, do you wish to revise your statement "the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him"?
yes sorry it was 1998 he died, he was one of the wounded 3 survivors, he was taken back to vietnam than later taken back to cambodia and place under house arrest, where he died, i never check the up date page. thats all but the rest is spot on or very close. it was the vietnam with chinesee backing that invaded cambodia to end the mass murdering. where no one else would.
this is from an indian news paper near at the time, when there was medical camps on the boarder of cambodia that had been there since the hight of pol-pot power and when they first relise what was going on in cambodia, and did nothing about it.
a bit like the genocide in rwanda again the western world would do nothing about it again. genocide should be the main reason why a country should be invaded. and not the reason like they like to keep hidden a country wealth or a country that is a gateway to get at another country wealth
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Check out the Bank of England website. Lots of infalations stats on there, inflation peaked at 25% in 1975 and inflation averaged 135 for the seventies. North Korea and South Korea are two independant nations, the North invaded the South. The UN sent in troops to stop the aggressor, the North. I have similar answers for your others points but do not wish to bore the others[/p][/quote]the bank of england figure are for interest rate on leading and borrowing money that is not inflation. good examples of inflation is take a look at how much wages was increase in the 70's for state owned industrys. there pay rises was only 2/3 of inflation, whitch amounted to 2 and half percent of there wages for most of the 70's. this increased a bit when the working hour week was reduce down to 37 1/2 hours from 40 hours, but went back down again when things settle in. north korea and south korea was one country right up to the end of the war, and only became independant countrys because of the un, korea was in the middle of a revolution and turning to communsim that had started during the occupation of korea by japan in WW2 just like china and many other far eastern countrys whitch was not in the interest of the usa because of it oil, those countrys that did not have any wealth was left alone, its was not in the interest for any country to control its own wealth that oil companys could not control it would mean they would aft to buy it at full price and not throw a few pennys and call it revenue tax, all wars from WW1 need oil and have been the major cause of wars since in wars. 3 industrys make the rich more rich and more powerful that is oil, bankers and the arms industry and all 3 will give back handers to politicains to do there bidding for them. and one of those biddings is to stop countrys going commuisum or socialism, because if do turn to communisum or socialism then the oil companys lose out a great deal of profit, and there will be need for bankers to lead money to that country because the oil will be doing all the paying so that leaves arms, even they would be out of pocket to because a communist or socialist dont start wars they only protect there own boarders, and will only invade another if there is genocide going on, like what vietnam done in cambodia[/p][/quote]Cambodia and pol pot where directly controled from China. Look to china before you blame Vietnam.[/p][/quote]no they was not, you dont know your history very well, mind you it might of help you if you was alive or old enough to under stand what was going on in that region at the time. cambodia government before pol-pot was a middle of the road buddist government and it would not interfer in other countrys business they could't even if they wanted to, this did not suit the usa, next thing you know was that usa bomb the combodia capital killing most of the government, pol-pot then took over closed its doors to the world and started the mass killings, even when the western world found out about it they done nothing, the moment vietnam won it war, the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him and on him was a suit case of usa dollars usa guns. and prisoners talking about the usa involvement. pol-pot was usa back and supported, china supported vietnam by two ways supplying them with russian guns and to march across the boarder if the usa got to close to the boarder of china, usa might of won most of its battles but they lost the major ones and also lost the political war so they lost war all together. china at no stage supported cambodia it was not in there interest to do so. and the only reason china suppoted vietnam was because they share oil fields that cross the two countrys boarder and they did not want the usa near that oil because they would of pump it dry just to stop china getting its fair share like what is happen now vietnam and china shares that oil and is shared equal after all deduction and running costs. look whats happening in the gulf of mexico usa is drilling across the boarder in to cubian waters just to get at there oil that dont belong to them.[/p][/quote]southy, Pol Pot died 15 April 1998. Vietnam invaded in November 1978. . So, do you wish to revise your statement "the first thing they done was invade cambodia and put a stop to the mass murders they cornered pol-pot in the southerner region and killing him"?[/p][/quote]yes sorry it was 1998 he died, he was one of the wounded 3 survivors, he was taken back to vietnam than later taken back to cambodia and place under house arrest, where he died, i never check the up date page. thats all but the rest is spot on or very close. it was the vietnam with chinesee backing that invaded cambodia to end the mass murdering. where no one else would. this is from an indian news paper near at the time, when there was medical camps on the boarder of cambodia that had been there since the hight of pol-pot power and when they first relise what was going on in cambodia, and did nothing about it. a bit like the genocide in rwanda again the western world would do nothing about it again. genocide should be the main reason why a country should be invaded. and not the reason like they like to keep hidden a country wealth or a country that is a gateway to get at another country wealth southy
  • Score: 0

9:51pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then.
That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then.
yes well when china stops getting threats from countrys like the usa, they more than likely open there doors and then we can find out what china is really about, whitch will interest me a lot, it could turn out to be another right wing country like we are finding out about russia now thats all it was after lenin just a another right wing country, and that took the collapse of russia to find that out.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then.[/p][/quote]yes well when china stops getting threats from countrys like the usa, they more than likely open there doors and then we can find out what china is really about, whitch will interest me a lot, it could turn out to be another right wing country like we are finding out about russia now thats all it was after lenin just a another right wing country, and that took the collapse of russia to find that out. southy
  • Score: 0

10:21pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then.
yes well when china stops getting threats from countrys like the usa, they more than likely open there doors and then we can find out what china is really about, whitch will interest me a lot, it could turn out to be another right wing country like we are finding out about russia now thats all it was after lenin just a another right wing country, and that took the collapse of russia to find that out.
Can we start a whip round to send southy on a fact finding tour of China?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: That must have been in the days when China had a right wing government then.[/p][/quote]yes well when china stops getting threats from countrys like the usa, they more than likely open there doors and then we can find out what china is really about, whitch will interest me a lot, it could turn out to be another right wing country like we are finding out about russia now thats all it was after lenin just a another right wing country, and that took the collapse of russia to find that out.[/p][/quote]Can we start a whip round to send southy on a fact finding tour of China? v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

10:40pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Condor Man says...

Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart. Condor Man
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Mon 26 Apr 10

Boutros Boutros Ghali says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.
Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.
Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy?
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.[/p][/quote]Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.[/p][/quote]Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy? Boutros Boutros Ghali
  • Score: 0

10:59pm Mon 26 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

Condor Man wrote:
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.[/p][/quote]Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

11:17pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

Condor Man wrote:
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
i been to cuba a couple of times, there people are not staving they are better feeded than the poor are here in the uk, what cuba lacks is good steel and concrete both have got to be imported it dont have the natural minerals to produce this stuff, it can produce most stuff if it had those two minerals. and to import it cost a lot money, lift the trade embargo on them that the usa tells every one to apply to. then see what happens, they also export a lot of teachers to.
and venezuala is doing a lot better now than it ever was. you can find this out your self easy enough now days with the internet you can chat to the ordinary people them selfs and find out things, they are just has interested in what really happening in other countrys.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.[/p][/quote]i been to cuba a couple of times, there people are not staving they are better feeded than the poor are here in the uk, what cuba lacks is good steel and concrete both have got to be imported it dont have the natural minerals to produce this stuff, it can produce most stuff if it had those two minerals. and to import it cost a lot money, lift the trade embargo on them that the usa tells every one to apply to. then see what happens, they also export a lot of teachers to. and venezuala is doing a lot better now than it ever was. you can find this out your self easy enough now days with the internet you can chat to the ordinary people them selfs and find out things, they are just has interested in what really happening in other countrys. southy
  • Score: 0

11:25pm Mon 26 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.
have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture"
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.[/p][/quote]Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.[/p][/quote]have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture" southy
  • Score: 0

12:31am Tue 27 Apr 10

allsaintsnocurves says...

southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.
have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture"
yeah or Brown when he opens his mouth! Is he scared by only visiting labour safe seats? I think so..
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.[/p][/quote]Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.[/p][/quote]have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture"[/p][/quote]yeah or Brown when he opens his mouth! Is he scared by only visiting labour safe seats? I think so.. allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

8:10am Tue 27 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.
Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.
Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy?
Ah, so there we have your argument. Use tax payers' money now to ensure that they pay even more tax in the future. I would rather they use their own money, and let them keep more of it in the future. Let's have a flat tax rate, as UKIP suggest.

I am not saying they need to save up for their education, they can get a job whilst they are studying. The company I work for employs students on a part time basis, and their hours are suited to fit around their schedule at university.
[quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.[/p][/quote]Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.[/p][/quote]Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy?[/p][/quote]Ah, so there we have your argument. Use tax payers' money now to ensure that they pay even more tax in the future. I would rather they use their own money, and let them keep more of it in the future. Let's have a flat tax rate, as UKIP suggest. I am not saying they need to save up for their education, they can get a job whilst they are studying. The company I work for employs students on a part time basis, and their hours are suited to fit around their schedule at university. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

10:10am Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

allsaintsnocurves wrote:
southy wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
Condor Man wrote:
Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table.

Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.
Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.
have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture"
yeah or Brown when he opens his mouth! Is he scared by only visiting labour safe seats? I think so..
so you think both southampton seats are safe labour seats, oh well the tory voters might has well in southampton come polling day no point in voting, like they now say a vote for the tory's is a wasted vote, be better for tory voter to vote liberals, might have a chance then of removing at lest one of southampton labour mp's
[quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: Perhaps Southy should go on a fact finding mission to all those workers paradises- Cuba, Venezuala and North Korea where people are starving. Cuba may export doctors but that's no consolation if there's no food on the table. Back to the election it was telling that David Cameron went to the proper University today whereas Gordon Brown went to Solent- just goes to show they are leagues apart.[/p][/quote]Maybee he like the performing arts. Besides it keeps the que down at the dole office.[/p][/quote]have you notice the green bracelet that cameron has on, is he trying to fool people in saying with out saying it in words "oh look at me i am green you can trust me with the environment yea right we can, just has much has you can trust blair with his open hands guessture"[/p][/quote]yeah or Brown when he opens his mouth! Is he scared by only visiting labour safe seats? I think so..[/p][/quote]so you think both southampton seats are safe labour seats, oh well the tory voters might has well in southampton come polling day no point in voting, like they now say a vote for the tory's is a wasted vote, be better for tory voter to vote liberals, might have a chance then of removing at lest one of southampton labour mp's southy
  • Score: 0

10:20am Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote:
Boutros Boutros Ghali wrote:
Mr Ellis wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.
So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.
Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.
Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy?
Ah, so there we have your argument. Use tax payers' money now to ensure that they pay even more tax in the future. I would rather they use their own money, and let them keep more of it in the future. Let's have a flat tax rate, as UKIP suggest.

I am not saying they need to save up for their education, they can get a job whilst they are studying. The company I work for employs students on a part time basis, and their hours are suited to fit around their schedule at university.
if you want a flat tax rate, then you should also have the council tax flat also and charge by the sq meter of ground space that is covered, and your water rates should also reflect on how much ground space there is and weather if you have a pool or a pond and if you own a second home that second home or more if you got any should be tax has a business
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boutros Boutros Ghali[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: Don't hide behind your working class background and complain about how you are not "privileged". Get a job, and pay for your own education. Further education is not a right. Working hard to get it will put you in a higher position with any potential employer, who will see you have the motivation to work, and not be reliant on others to give you what you want. And if some people are able to have it paid for them by their parents, good luck to them. Life is not fair, and as soon as the Lib Dems and Labour understand this, the better.[/p][/quote]So essentially a student who is not forward thinking in having parents wealthy enough to support them at uni, should have to work twice as hard as those who do? Students earn their right to study at the universities of this country by working hard to pass exams and then repay their loans through paid employment, contributing to society at the same time through taxation. Much of the work they do will contribute to the national good be it in terms of research, development, business creation and enterprise or public service. Surely this is to be encouraged rather than shot down as wishy-washy, liberal or loony left. A more valid criticism of the university system is whether all the courses that the assorted organisations offer are viable or even worthwhile.[/p][/quote]Absolutely they have to work twice as hard! It is no ones right to demand that I or anyone else should pay for their education, except my own children. There are no rights to demand other people's money for your own gain. The "state" will educate you to a basic level. It is then up to you to make the most of that - don't expect other people to have to pay so that you can get a better job. Surely that is making you more privileged than the person that is not as intelligent as you.[/p][/quote]Then this really isn't a meritocracy, something most conservatives seem to promote. Who do you want to educate, nurse and heal your children? Those who were able to afford further education or the best of those who were able to receive education? Say a bright A-level student from a low earning family wishes to study medicine, what possible purpose does it serve to have them struggle for a few years earning enough to finance 5 years + of medical study, rather than enable them to qualify, compete on a level playing field with other med students and pay some whopping income tax and NI back into the system? Surely giving people the opportunity to develop as far as possible is for the common good, or would you prefer your children to be taught English by Southy?[/p][/quote]Ah, so there we have your argument. Use tax payers' money now to ensure that they pay even more tax in the future. I would rather they use their own money, and let them keep more of it in the future. Let's have a flat tax rate, as UKIP suggest. I am not saying they need to save up for their education, they can get a job whilst they are studying. The company I work for employs students on a part time basis, and their hours are suited to fit around their schedule at university.[/p][/quote]if you want a flat tax rate, then you should also have the council tax flat also and charge by the sq meter of ground space that is covered, and your water rates should also reflect on how much ground space there is and weather if you have a pool or a pond and if you own a second home that second home or more if you got any should be tax has a business southy
  • Score: 0

10:43am Tue 27 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors?
I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors? v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

11:01am Tue 27 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar.
I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

11:01am Tue 27 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar.
I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

11:12am Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors?
no refund because every one is charged with run off water, the problem is the law that dates back to the 80's,
what happens is some thing like this once water has landed it then class has a mineral, if the rain lands on the natural surface then there is no charge, but if it lands on a man made object then they can charge the water is then class has polluted and a waste product.
that was some thing like a ruling from a judge in the early 90's over on the isles of wight. why the case came about was because a guy owned a shed or building of some sort on a plot of land that had no water, no drainage no gutters or a soak away and no waste water of any kind or thats what he thought, and he could not under stand why he keep getting water bills. so he challenging it in court. and it turned out he did have waste water even lo it was just running of and straight into the ground.
when water is a mineral its owned by the crown/state. water companys buy that right for the water off the crown/state, should water land on a building then that water is not a mineral and becomes a waste. and they can charge for the waste being taken away even lo if it soak into the ground.
band e ok has long has you charge every one by the sq meter of ground space they take up. and any more homes a person might have be charge has a business.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors?[/p][/quote]no refund because every one is charged with run off water, the problem is the law that dates back to the 80's, what happens is some thing like this once water has landed it then class has a mineral, if the rain lands on the natural surface then there is no charge, but if it lands on a man made object then they can charge the water is then class has polluted and a waste product. that was some thing like a ruling from a judge in the early 90's over on the isles of wight. why the case came about was because a guy owned a shed or building of some sort on a plot of land that had no water, no drainage no gutters or a soak away and no waste water of any kind or thats what he thought, and he could not under stand why he keep getting water bills. so he challenging it in court. and it turned out he did have waste water even lo it was just running of and straight into the ground. when water is a mineral its owned by the crown/state. water companys buy that right for the water off the crown/state, should water land on a building then that water is not a mineral and becomes a waste. and they can charge for the waste being taken away even lo if it soak into the ground. band e ok has long has you charge every one by the sq meter of ground space they take up. and any more homes a person might have be charge has a business. southy
  • Score: 0

11:19am Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar.
I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not.
but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.[/p][/quote]how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them. southy
  • Score: 0

11:54am Tue 27 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.
The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple.
You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels.
You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could.
Every village needs an idiot.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.[/p][/quote]how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.[/p][/quote]The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot. sound ranger
  • Score: 0

11:56am Tue 27 Apr 10

goard says...

Southy is in his element - he is old labour and tries 'so hard' to be fair in his loyalty to New Labour - but surely even he must realise we sure are in a mess.
The thing is that those that are 'comfortable' I mean warm, belly filled, and an income coming in each week or fortnight must surely pin their flagtoll to the Government who provides this - much like those up North, the millions that are on welfare, being given a weekly paypacket - would we not vote for Labour - of course we would. Pensioners do have it hard, but they will look back on their old dad having the only egg for his breakfast to go to work on - and will think themselves lucky. It is such a tangled web Government have woven that even they do not know where they are with it. If Conservatives get in we will be shocked as to our survival, as with the Lib Dems - we are on the brink of a social shock but we will survive - as the ol' uns' always say 'In our day......' but it is true - we can survive.

goard
Southy is in his element - he is old labour and tries 'so hard' to be fair in his loyalty to New Labour - but surely even he must realise we sure are in a mess. The thing is that those that are 'comfortable' I mean warm, belly filled, and an income coming in each week or fortnight must surely pin their flagtoll to the Government who provides this - much like those up North, the millions that are on welfare, being given a weekly paypacket - would we not vote for Labour - of course we would. Pensioners do have it hard, but they will look back on their old dad having the only egg for his breakfast to go to work on - and will think themselves lucky. It is such a tangled web Government have woven that even they do not know where they are with it. If Conservatives get in we will be shocked as to our survival, as with the Lib Dems - we are on the brink of a social shock but we will survive - as the ol' uns' always say 'In our day......' but it is true - we can survive. goard goard
  • Score: 0

1:22pm Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.
The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple.
You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels.
You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could.
Every village needs an idiot.
historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out.
let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story.
like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter.
before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war.
you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it.
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.[/p][/quote]how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.[/p][/quote]The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot.[/p][/quote]historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out. let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story. like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter. before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war. you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it. southy
  • Score: 0

2:09pm Tue 27 Apr 10

sound ranger says...

southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.
The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot.
historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out. let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story. like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter. before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war. you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it.
I rest my case
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.[/p][/quote]how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.[/p][/quote]The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot.[/p][/quote]historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out. let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story. like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter. before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war. you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it.[/p][/quote]I rest my case sound ranger
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Tue 27 Apr 10

lowe esteem says...

sooner hear the comments of these students than some of the "adults" that have posted on here. When are some of you going to break away from your ill-thought dogma and have the balls to vote for a proper change. You've watched and tried the rest now try the best, the Lib-Dems are where the proper idealogy comes from.
sooner hear the comments of these students than some of the "adults" that have posted on here. When are some of you going to break away from your ill-thought dogma and have the balls to vote for a proper change. You've watched and tried the rest now try the best, the Lib-Dems are where the proper idealogy comes from. lowe esteem
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote:
southy wrote:
sound ranger wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.
how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.
The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot.
historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out. let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story. like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter. before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war. you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it.
I rest my case
the only case you rest is your ability not to see though what is and what is not propaganda, but carry on.
your kids by the way if they taken or are going to take history will probley be learning some thing i done way back on my last year at school. it was approved and pass to be fact in the 90's and has been added into the history books
[quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sound ranger[/bold] wrote: Southy, with all due respect, you are either a fool or a liar. I think most of us already know the answer to that question.[/p][/quote]how about it could be that you miss under stand me in what i am trying to say. and calling any one a fool or a liar with out proof is fool hardy ground to stand on is it not. but carry on because the more you do it, the more people think ah there is some in what southy is saying, its getting the backs up on a tiny few people, maybe its the truth they dont like and its coming back to haunt them.[/p][/quote]The historical facts mean nothing to you, plain and simple. You may wish to airbrush history to suit your arguements, but the simple truth is you are wrong on so many levels. You carry on posting as you do more damage to yourself then I ever could. Every village needs an idiot.[/p][/quote]historical facts mean a lot to me, and the plain and simple truth you are unable to see what is false political propaganda and what is not and there is a lot of false propaganda, at lest i do try and see though that false propaganda. and has one usa general once said history is written by the victor's weather if there version history is right or wrong, and it be the future generations to sort it all out. let me give you an easy example, wwii north africa, every one praise montgomery and the americans for winning the battle of north africa. whitch is true so you use this fact, but what they will not tell you is that the germans was beating twice before hand and the germans & itanlians army could of been kick of north africa way before montgomery and the americans turned up. but the british government failed in there duty mainly winson churchill in supplying the equipment that was needed to finish of the job, in fact he stop any more gear going there till montgomery turned up. and this fact was hidden up for a long time, this is one form of propaganda only telling part of the whole story. like the american will not amitt that they lost the war in veitnam but the truth here is that all the major battles and the political war going on at the same time they got there butts kick, there was one major battle that the usa nearly won but because of agreement between china and vietnam and theres no two ways about it china did support vietnam to hilt, china cross into vietnam and boosted up the vietnam troops, and china did not support cambodia at all, that is just usa political false propaganda they could not been seen that they was the cause of the mess in that country by supporting one rebel then supporting another, even the bombing of cambodia capital killing all those government members stayed hidden for a while, and it this news was first release in india the american denied it happening and if it did happen it was not them. and when the ground pictures was publish of planes bombing the capital the americans had to come clean but even then they was altering the facts to suit them, like one of the storys gave a later date to when it really happen, and there excuse was that they was after anti rebel government forces and blame them for the killing of all the government members, but if it was not for that indian news paper we would not know the true date of the bombing of the capital, even to-day the usa still denieds the true date. its not in there interest for people to know the whole truth of the matter. before the wwii in the far east communism was all ready on the move and exspaning, but when the war broke out in this area of the world it came to a near holt, during the war the american told the europians after the war all empires in the had to stop, this was because the usa like the rest of europe knew that there was oil in the far east, but theres this problem communism was taken the area over and with that would mean no cheap oil for the west, this is why the un under usa orders to help out in the stop of communism spreading thats why there was lines draw across vietnam and korea, you need to know this about korea it was a dependencey provenance to china for 100's of years before the war. you can only know what is true facts and what is not when you get rid off any false propaganda and believe me there is loads of it on all sides, the 20th century and even now at the beginning of this century is the worse so far in history for false propaganda, and if you chose to, or wish in believing that false propaganda go ahead who am i to try and stop you. but your the kind if living in 1915 who would believe in that propaganda that the germans eat babys. that as put about by the british government. its some thing we all laugh about now days, but it did happen and people did believe in it.[/p][/quote]I rest my case[/p][/quote]the only case you rest is your ability not to see though what is and what is not propaganda, but carry on. your kids by the way if they taken or are going to take history will probley be learning some thing i done way back on my last year at school. it was approved and pass to be fact in the 90's and has been added into the history books southy
  • Score: 0

2:24pm Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

lowe esteem wrote:
sooner hear the comments of these students than some of the "adults" that have posted on here. When are some of you going to break away from your ill-thought dogma and have the balls to vote for a proper change. You've watched and tried the rest now try the best, the Lib-Dems are where the proper idealogy comes from.
lowe to be truthful with you if i was going to vote, but i am not for me there is no one to vote for, liberals would be the way i would of voted. only because they are the closes to the centre ground, labour has gone right and tory are sitting on that line of being fascist. that is to far right for me.
[quote][p][bold]lowe esteem[/bold] wrote: sooner hear the comments of these students than some of the "adults" that have posted on here. When are some of you going to break away from your ill-thought dogma and have the balls to vote for a proper change. You've watched and tried the rest now try the best, the Lib-Dems are where the proper idealogy comes from.[/p][/quote]lowe to be truthful with you if i was going to vote, but i am not for me there is no one to vote for, liberals would be the way i would of voted. only because they are the closes to the centre ground, labour has gone right and tory are sitting on that line of being fascist. that is to far right for me. southy
  • Score: 0

3:18pm Tue 27 Apr 10

v_dubman2005 says...

Save the planet.............V
ote green.
Save the planet.............V ote green. v_dubman2005
  • Score: 0

3:57pm Tue 27 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors?
Just get a metre, then you just pay for what you use.

And yes, the council tax should be flat - Poll Tax anybody? The fairest tax this country has ever had. Each adult pays their fair share. I have six people in my house, my mother lives on her own. Her house is in a higher band than mine - why should she pay more? That is not "fair". Local taxes are for services, they should not be used to distribute wealth.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: I have a pond. However I harvest all rain water falling on my roof, I collect all our grey water and use it flush the loo and I have minimized all hard surfaces to avoid wash off and therefore water that has to be taken away via drainage. Can I have a discount please? And yes we should standardize the council tax (for those that pay it). Lets put everybody in to band E. Any objectors?[/p][/quote]Just get a metre, then you just pay for what you use. And yes, the council tax should be flat - Poll Tax anybody? The fairest tax this country has ever had. Each adult pays their fair share. I have six people in my house, my mother lives on her own. Her house is in a higher band than mine - why should she pay more? That is not "fair". Local taxes are for services, they should not be used to distribute wealth. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

4:02pm Tue 27 Apr 10

Mr Ellis says...

v_dubman2005 wrote:
Save the planet.............V ote green.
Really? I assume you are joking.
[quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: Save the planet.............V ote green.[/p][/quote]Really? I assume you are joking. Mr Ellis
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Tue 27 Apr 10

southy says...

Mr Ellis wrote:
v_dubman2005 wrote:
Save the planet.............V ote green.
Really? I assume you are joking.
the v comes from that old tv show V = visitor,s = a lizard in human a appearance/form of an outer shell, aliens from another planet.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Ellis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]v_dubman2005[/bold] wrote: Save the planet.............V ote green.[/p][/quote]Really? I assume you are joking.[/p][/quote]the v comes from that old tv show V = visitor,s = a lizard in human a appearance/form of an outer shell, aliens from another planet. southy
  • Score: 0

10:17pm Tue 27 Apr 10

lowe esteem says...

See what i mean? These people questioning those students, they have become so entrenched in their views, they sound quite fanatical, or maybe mad? Frightening to think they're entitled to a vote,too.
See what i mean? These people questioning those students, they have become so entrenched in their views, they sound quite fanatical, or maybe mad? Frightening to think they're entitled to a vote,too. lowe esteem
  • Score: 0

12:01am Wed 28 Apr 10

southy says...

the world is changing thats all, its even happening in that strong hold capitalist world the usa, people are getting fed up with the ruin thats being cause by right wing politics. maybe roosevelt dream he had about a new social order is coming true, it was a shame he died at the time when he did, because the next president wanted nothing to do with it.
the world is changing thats all, its even happening in that strong hold capitalist world the usa, people are getting fed up with the ruin thats being cause by right wing politics. maybe roosevelt dream he had about a new social order is coming true, it was a shame he died at the time when he did, because the next president wanted nothing to do with it. southy
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree