View From The Top

*cough* Duckhouse. *cough* Moat clearing.

The message is clear. The populace at large wants real change and don't believe that either the tories or labour can deliver it. I still expect a tory victory but I believe a genuine sea change in British politics is in the offing.

He's not sharp enough to put that all together though. In fact, I doubt he knows it anyway.

Just remember that Stanley/Dune attends National Front rallies so it shouldn't be a surprise that he chooses a neo-fascist party to support. On another thread he says his politics is more akin to UKIP but he's not voting for them either. Stanley, simple lad that he is, is very confused.

Too easy to beat you Mr NF.

Out. Of. Your. Depth.

It's more or less what he said. I watched it this morning getting ready for work.

I'm take the word of a respected (one of the few) US General over that of a NF rally attending neo-nazi thank you Stanley. I would suggest you go away and brush up on the reports published.

I refer you to my previous answer.

Current yes. Future replacement no.

So the US enquiries into the war in Iraq, that concluded that there was no evidence of Iraq being a safe haven for terrorists is wrong is it? I think General Petraeus is slightly better placed than you. Out. Of. Your. Depth.

Thus no vote needed. Next.

They are running so scared is laughable. The arrogant cu*ts thought it was in the bag.

So out of your depth it's scary.

Answer the question comrade. Why aren't ANY MPs, of ANY party up in arms about not voting on it? Why aren't the tories or Liberals shouting about it from the rooftops? You don't know do you and it's making you look rather silly.

You do know why that is don't you? I wouldn't want you to get confused to why any MP of any colour isn't up in arms about not having a vote on it and why it isn't an issue at this election.

Wrong. The "rebels" on the government side backed down when they realised how it would look if the government of the day had to rely on opposition votes to push through a policy. Gutless fookers for backing down. They put their seats before their principals.

Please, don't confuse them anymore.

So going to war based on lies, costing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, making the UK more unsafe only matters if your politics is left of centre? Please tell me that you've not found a amoeba to breed with?

Whoooooooooosh.

Because the tory leadership in 2005 made Blair look like King Solomon. The choice was Howard or Blair and you wonder why Blair won? Many Labour supporters, myself included, didn't vote from them in 2005 because of the war issue. Only the extremely naive believe that the tories weren't keen for the war. The fact that the government of the day believed that they were going to have to rely on the tories to get the vote through the Commons speaks volumes. Neither red nor blue come out of the Iraq fiasco looking good.

That actually has nothing to do with the Stoke Central issue. The problem there is linked to internal issues and the impact the BNP has had in that constituency (and it's a bloody grim place).

I don't think he'll play Wotton. I hope not anyway.

So your mithering about nowt Stanley.

It's really paid dividends in the last decade! A permanent seat on the security council means nowt now. We are a small, broke, island off Europe and should stop trying to be anything more than that. Germany hasn't done too badly not having a seat. We can still be a nuclear power we just don't need a submersible delivery method designed for a conflict long passed. MAD. Hard to argue against it. So we need to spend billions and billions on a replacement for Trident to deliver mega ton payloads ballistically despite there being cheaper and just as effective delivery methods? It's a blunt weapon where a rapier is required.