• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Our next unelected PM?

GlennB said:
Yes it is.

What with you and ceptimus we have two people in the thread who are constantly arguing against established facts. What's going on?
Click to expand...
You have it wrong again. :) I'm one of those who are posting facts to correct the errors of others.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
No one believes Bamber did the crime after a glance at the evidence.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
There's a thread for conspiratorial nonsense about Bamber, kindly keep your ramblings there and don't contaminate this one.
 
ceptimus said:
I spell it out when I make a 'claim'. On the one occasion I did recently, you were shown to be totally wrong with your usual and predictable reflex action of posting, 'liar'.
Click to expand...
Such rewriting of history, very Trumpian.
Rather like your lies about Sturgeon's elections.
 
abaddon said:
In the 2014 election for First Minister her opponent was Ruth Davidson.

In the 2016 election for First Minister her opponent was Willie Rennie.

You are wrong.
Click to expand...
You don't expect ceptimus to be deterred by mere facts do you?
 
catsmate said:
Such rewriting of history, very Trumpian.
Rather like your lies about Sturgeon's elections.
Click to expand...
Anyone can read through the thread and see that I was right and you were wrong. On top of that you continue to break forum rules by posting insults rather than arguments.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
A nautical mile is based on the circumference of the earth, and is equal to one minute of latitude at the equator.

A knot is a speed of one nautical mile per hour.

A nautical mile and a knot are not 'imperial' they are dictated by the circumference of the earth and the requirements of navigation.
Click to expand...
The kilometre had a similar origin.
 
catsmate said:
:rolleyes:
There's a thread for conspiratorial nonsense about Bamber, kindly keep your ramblings there and don't contaminate this one.
Click to expand...
This thread is about the new prime minister and the team he has gathered around him. And what they are doing now, and their records. The woman was in favour of the death penalty, which if applied to Bamber would be one of those rare cases of executing an innocent man.
Some but not all deem that unacceptable.
This looks a thoroughly evil administration to me, but I don't need to suffer the consequences.
 
ceptimus said:
Anyone can read through the thread and see that I was right and you were wrong. On top of that you continue to break forum rules by posting insults rather than arguments.
Click to expand...

Everyone who reads this thread will see you are wrong about multiple things. As has shown to be the case. Nobody agrees with your warped logic and made up facts. Nobody. Not one person.
 
Samson said:
This thread is about the new prime minister and the team he has gathered around him. And what they are doing now, and their records. The woman was in favour of the death penalty, which if applied to Bamber would be one of those rare cases of executing an innocent man.
Some but not all deem that unacceptable.
This looks a thoroughly evil administration to me, but I don't need to suffer the consequences.
Click to expand...

There is nothing innocent about Bamber. The forensics are conclusive.
 
An unelected idiot is now prime minister. He has appointed extremists around him, one of which is Priti Patel to home secretary. That is what I see, as a spectator to a blood sport. She expressed a view in a criminal case which is not just wrong on facts, but states a desire to cancel a citizen's rights to communicate.
Good luck, you gonna need it.
 
Samson said:
An unelected idiot is now prime minister. He has appointed extremists around him, one of which is Priti Patel to home secretary. That is what I see, as a spectator to a blood sport. She expressed a view in a criminal case which is not just wrong on facts, but states a desire to cancel a citizen's rights to communicate.
Good luck, you gonna need it.
Click to expand...

Point of information: Britain has never had an elected prime minister. The British prime minister is appointed by the monarch and always has been. Convention says that the monarch will appoint the leader of the party most likely to be able to form a government, but there's no law that says she has to.
 
jeremyp said:
Point of information: Britain has never had an elected prime minister. The British prime minister is appointed by the monarch and always has been. Convention says that the monarch will appoint the leader of the party most likely to be able to form a government, but there's no law that says she has to.
Click to expand...

She could always pretend she was out.
 
jeremyp said:
Point of information: Britain has never had an elected prime minister. The British prime minister is appointed by the monarch and always has been. Convention says that the monarch will appoint the leader of the party most likely to be able to form a government, but there's no law that says she has to.
Click to expand...
This is similar to New Zealand of course, but the substance of the issue is that the electorate have a leader foisted on them who they had no control over at the ballot box. This current setup could not be more egregious, where it seems that there can be a permanent and life threatening change to the lives of the majority by an arguably insane individual. In New Zealand, these transitional leaders are always beaten next time round, Bill Rowling, Mike Moore, Jenny Shipley, Bill English to name the last few I can think of.
 
jeremyp said:
Point of information: Britain has never had an elected prime minister. The British prime minister is appointed by the monarch and always has been. Convention says that the monarch will appoint the leader of the party most likely to be able to form a government, but there's no law that says she has to.
Click to expand...

That's pedantic in the extreme, and even close to wrong in this case.

Here, the governing party is already established and ~120k Tory party members elected Johnson. The Queen is rarely faced with a 'most likely' scenario, and certainly wasn't in this case.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom