Violent unprovoked attack on Nick Griffin by UAF thugs

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:03 pm

I'm sure the content of my link will bring much mirth to my fellow countrymen.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Egg attack on BNP leader Griffin

However, this was an attack by approx 80 to 100 UAF thugs on one man.

Weather you love or loathe the man, he is an elected member of the European Parliment. In this incident, the police appeared t turn a blind eye.

Is this not hypocricy of the highest order?

What would the reaction be should this have been any other member of Parliment?

It is easy to label the BNP as Neo-Nazi, fascist racists thugs yet here we are seeing the very violence by the UAF funded and supported by Cameron and other prominent MP's, that the BNP have been accused of in the past.

Do our Politicians realise that this is the actions that drive new members to the BNP daily?

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:54 pm

Plus as was pointed out on TV yesterday, pelting him with eggs is a waste of good food!:yh_rotfl

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:42 am

oscar;1203050 wrote: I'm sure the content of my link will bring much mirth to my fellow countrymen.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Egg attack on BNP leader Griffin

However, this was an attack by approx 80 to 100 UAF thugs on one man.

Weather you love or loathe the man, he is an elected member of the European Parliment. In this incident, the police appeared t turn a blind eye.

Is this not hypocricy of the highest order?

What would the reaction be should this have been any other member of Parliment?

It is easy to label the BNP as Neo-Nazi, fascist racists thugs yet here we are seeing the very violence by the UAF funded and supported by Cameron and other prominent MP's, that the BNP have been accused of in the past.

Do our Politicians realise that this is the actions that drive new members to the BNP daily?

We know what it would be look at the reaction when someone threw slime at Mandelson.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:50 am

gmc;1203063 wrote: We know what it would be look at the reaction when someone threw slime at Mandelson. Yes, but then there were still people who thought that was hilarious. His attacker was eventually charged. The police turned a complete blind eye on this occassion.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:58 am

oscar;1203105 wrote: Yes, but then there were still people who thought that was hilarious. His attacker was eventually charged. The police turned a complete blind eye on this occassion.

That was my point, mandelsons attacker gets arrested (jury trial would be interesting) john prescott tales the moral high ground and the basic principle is the same-should people be allowed to throw things at politicians with impunity? Arguably mandelson is doing more damage to the UK

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 7:06 am

gmc;1203128 wrote: That was my point, mandelsons attacker gets arrested (jury trial would be interesting) john prescott tales the moral high ground and the basic principle is the same-should people be allowed to throw things at politicians with impunity? Arguably mandelson is doing more damage to the UK I will say the exact same about Griffin as i did on the case of 'Mandy'. It is clearly an assault charge. In this case it was not one barmy protester, it was 80 to 100 UAF thugs. Why did the police turn their back? Because it was Nick Griffin i suspect. Weather anyone agrees or not, he is a MEP that has been elected by the public in a supposedly democratic country.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:37 am

Violent unprovoked attack on Nick Griffin by UAF thugs oh come on:wah: I thought a few ppl threw some eggs at him ,,, i mean they probs didnt want him feeling left out, most of the other political parties have had some such thing,, eggs, slime whatever;)

oscar;1203130 wrote: I will say the exact same about Griffin as i did on the case of 'Mandy'. It is clearly an assault charge. In this case it was not one barmy protester, it was 80 to 100 UAF thugs. Why did the police turn their back? Because it was Nick Griffin i suspect. Weather anyone agrees or not, he is a MEP that has been elected by the public in a supposedly democratic country.

joking aside,, I understand what you aare saying ,, the law is the law,, rules is rules ,, there cant be one foe some and not the other, do you know the full facts? maybe the one who got eggs thrown at hm didnt want any charges pressed? I dunno. I do think they are doing more harm for their cause than good(the egg throwers i mean) that is not the way to protest really.

There was i think also some reports of overzealous BNP bodygauards?:sneaky:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:43 am

kazalala;1203196 wrote:

There was i think also some reports of overzealous BNP bodygauards?:sneaky: I was not over zealous...... i'm still on my years conditional discharge from the courts and i acted with great restrain. :sneaky:

Seriously...... i do have some imfo on what really happened. Will google and see if i can add more.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:53 am

kazalala;1203196 wrote: Violent unprovoked attack on Nick Griffin by UAF thugs oh come on:wah: I thought a few ppl threw some eggs at him ,,, i mean they probs didnt want him feeling left out, most of the other political parties have had some such thing,, eggs, slime whatever;)

joking aside,, I understand what you aare saying ,, the law is the law,, rules is rules ,, there cant be one foe some and not the other, do you know the full facts? maybe the one who got eggs thrown at hm didnt want any charges pressed? I dunno. I do think they are doing more harm for their cause than good(the egg throwers i mean) that is not the way to protest really.

There was i think also some reports of overzealous BNP bodygauards?:sneaky:

YouTube - BNP - UAF violence Interview with Nick Griffin MEP

Griffins interview.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:53 am

oscar;1203206 wrote: YouTube - BNP - UAF violence Interview with Nick Griffin MEP

Griffins interview.

OH god do i have to go look at him ,, and hear him ,,:-5:-5

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:55 am

kazalala;1203208 wrote: OH god do i have to go look at him ,, and hear him ,,:-5:-5
You are permitted to have this while your watching :wah:

Attached files

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:08 am

oscar;1203209 wrote: You are permitted to have this while your watching :wah:

:wah:

well sorry i did go look and turned it off after about a minute i think ,,, i just dont like him,, i dont believe him, and ,,, it was bloomin BNP TV fgs!:yh_rotfl

I dont condone any type of violence,, but well i thought the protesters had done themselves more harm than good but i also think he aint doing himself any good either moaning about everyone and everything ,,, and i aint got any allegience to the police either let me tell ya:wah: No he is just not sincere in my opinion ,,,

you know, i dont get riled up easily or over passionate about stuff easily,, sometimes i get mad at myself for not getting heated about stuff i probably should:wah:but i hate the BNP with a passion and the things they stand for ,,as in my mind they are racist and sexist and just plain horrible,, i hate them! If they were in charge they would be asking my grandad to go back to poland if he were still alive, they would be asking my uncle to go back to pakistan, if he were still alive, they would be asking my, they would be asking my aunt to go to some country of her origin if they could find out the country of her ancestors because none of us know where it is

..

I like to try to listen to all arguments and i will try to think a while and not be stubborn,, when you were on about standing for them i went researching and thought maybe i will be surprised,, no i wasnt. I will never ever change my mind about them.

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:12 am

kazalala;1203219 wrote: :wah:

well sorry i did go look and turned it off after about a minute i think ,,, i just dont like him,, i dont believe him, and ,,, it was bloomin BNP TV fgs!:yh_rotfl

I dont condone any type of violence,, but well i thought the protesters had done themselves more harm than good but i also think he aint doing himself any good either moaning about everyone and everything ,,, and i aint got any allegience to the police either let me tell ya:wah: No he is just not sincere in my opinion ,,,

you know, i dont get riled up easily or over passionate about stuff easily,, sometimes i get mad at myself for not getting heated about stuff i probably should:wah:but i hate the BNP with a passion and the things they stand for ,,as in my mind they are racist and sexist and just plain horrible,, i hate them! If they were in charge they would be asking my grandad to go back to poland if he were still alive, they would be asking my uncle to go back to pakistan, if he were still alive, they would be asking my, they would be asking my aunt to go to some country of her origin if they could find out the country of her ancestors because none of us know where it is

..

I like to try to listen to all arguments and i will try to think a while and not be stubborn,, when you were on about standing for them i went researching and thought maybe i will be surprised,, no i wasnt. I will never ever change my mind about them.

Gawd this is so hard for me to stay quiet about that remark:D;)

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:13 am

Carolly;1203221 wrote:

Gawd this is so hard for me to stay quiet about that remark:D;)

Oi!! ye cheeky mare:p:yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:22 am

kazalala;1203219 wrote: :wah:

well sorry i did go look and turned it off after about a minute i think ,,, i just dont like him,, i dont believe him, and ,,, it was bloomin BNP TV fgs!:yh_rotfl

I dont condone any type of violence,, but well i thought the protesters had done themselves more harm than good but i also think he aint doing himself any good either moaning about everyone and everything ,,, and i aint got any allegience to the police either let me tell ya:wah: No he is just not sincere in my opinion ,,,

you know, i dont get riled up easily or over passionate about stuff easily,, sometimes i get mad at myself for not getting heated about stuff i probably should:wah:but i hate the BNP with a passion and the things they stand for ,,as in my mind they are racist and sexist and just plain horrible,, i hate them! If they were in charge they would be asking my grandad to go back to poland if he were still alive, they would be asking my uncle to go back to pakistan, if he were still alive, they would be asking my, they would be asking my aunt to go to some country of her origin if they could find out the country of her ancestors because none of us know where it is

..

I like to try to listen to all arguments and i will try to think a while and not be stubborn,, when you were on about standing for them i went researching and thought maybe i will be surprised,, no i wasnt. I will never ever change my mind about them.

The problem i have found with the BNP is that most members are ordinary decent people who are not racist but ask people coming into our country to accept and embrace the British way of life. There is not one mainstream Party that will address the issue of mass immigration. It is some-thing that most people in the street are concerned about yet fear raising the subject as like the politicians, they would be accussed of being rascist by the far left brigade. It gets swept under the carpet but because Griffin is brutaly honest, many assume that all BNP supporters must be of his ilk.

John Tyndall formed the BNP as a splinter group of the National Front of which Griffin was a member and it is these roots that folk our age are averse to. Yet when i look back at the outrage of 'Oswald Mosley's Black Shirt Movement' and 'Enoch Powells' stance on mass immigration in the 60's, there was the same hysteria and hatred there.

If we were on the brink of mass immigration, Griffin's words would be more acceptable. Yet, it is too late. We are already a multi-culteral nation and as with your relatives, we can not simply send people 'back home' as some put it.

Our politicians do need to look at mass immigration seriously and quickly and frankly, i don't believe they have the balls to do it. All main stream Party leaders dodged the whole issue in the Euro campaigns. Griffin was the only one who spoke out. To say that Griffin is not sincere is some-what hypocritical with the shower of fraudsters we already have representing the country. How can he be any less sincere than that lying, cheating bunch of bastards?

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:39 am

but ask people coming into our country to accept and embrace the British way of life.
Thats fair enough, so why are the UKIP not good enough for this? they want to control immigration too and they also want to pull out of EU. Why are people saying they are voting BNP cos no one else will look at these issues, UKIP will but they dont have the "racist" tag,, so if its just a case of losing faith with the mainstream and using your vote as a protest,, why not UKIP?

but because Griffin is brutaly honest,
I just dont get that feeling:(

Our politicians do need to look at mass immigration seriously
Agreed.

To say that Griffin is not sincere is some-what hypocritical with the shower of fraudsters we already have representing the country. How can he be any less sincere than that lying, cheating bunch of bastards?

Just because i dont think HE is sincere,, dont mean i think any of the others are:sneaky:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:06 am

kazalala;1203243 wrote: Thats fair enough, so why are the UKIP not good enough for this? they want to control immigration too and they also want to pull out of EU. Why are people saying they are voting BNP cos no one else will look at these issues, UKIP will but they dont have the "racist" tag,, so if its just a case of losing faith with the mainstream and using your vote as a protest,, why not UKIP?

: UKIP do indeed want total withdrawal from the European Union as do the BNP. They also raise the question of mass immigration yet fail to lay out a hard line policy as Griffin does. They mumble and moan about it yet don't seem to follow it through with hard line policies on a ceiling for immigration.

I do believe that many have turned to the BNP due to the UAF. What started off as an opposition stance to fascism by many MP's and celebrities, it has turned into the very machine that the BNP are accussed of being. (Damn, i'm getting good at this politics speak :wah: ) We are supposed to be a free democratic society with the right to vote for any registered Political Party of our choosing yet the Labour government has admitted to sending out 'Battlebuses' to disrupt BNP meetings. How would the media portray the BNP should they be sending battlebuses of thugs out to disrupt Labour meetings? There would be arrests for one and the BNP would find them-selves likely to be de-registered. It is this hypocricy by government and prominent MP's who fund and support the UAF that have driven people right into the BNP's arms.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:13 am

oscar;1203276 wrote: UKIP do indeed want total withdrawal from the European Union as do the BNP. They also raise the question of mass immigration yet fail to lay out a hard line policy as Griffin does. They mumble and moan about it yet don't seem to follow it through with hard line policies on a ceiling for immigration.

.

here is their policy on Immigration.

The UK Independence Party is calling for a five-year freeze on immigration into Britain and a future policy that would see migrants controlled by a points system similar to that operated by Australia and New Zealand.

In the first of 17 policy papers to be unveiled at the party conference in London – and to be published over the coming weeks – UKIP proposes:

A five-year moratorium on immigration (except for people with parents or grandparents born in the UK) until proper immigration controls are put in place, and the situation regarding illegal immigrants has been resolved by means of expulsion or the granting of the legal right to stay.

The party says work permits should continue to be issued to companies requiring employees to work in the UK throughout this moratorium period.

After the moratorium, the policy paper says, future immigration would then be on a strictly controlled basis using a points system.

No one should be admitted unless they are fluent in English, have the required educational qualifications, demonstrate loyalty to the UK, its laws and values, and can support themselves financially, with no recourse to public funds – and this to apply equally to their dependents.

"Britain can only control immigration by reclaiming control of her borders," the policy paper states. "This can only be done by leaving the European Union, as the EU now controls asylum seeker policy and requires open borders under its immigration policies."

The party says recent research shows that 80% of people polled agreed to the statement, "We must control immigration even if this means leaving the EU".

In the same poll, conducted by Communicate Research (July 2007), nearly 70% of respondents believed that "our commitment to the EU means we can no longer control immigration".

The policy paper says future UK immigration policy should not discriminate in favour of EU citizens at the expense of Commonwealth citizens. There should be fair and equal treatment for all

It proposes that:

"Citizenship should be granted on a provisional basis for a ten-year probationary period. New citizens should be required to sign a ‘Declaration of Citizenship’. This Declaration would commit them to uphold the Britain’s democratic and tolerant way of life, to uphold the British Constitution, obey the laws, and not propagate extremist political or religious views during their probationary term. If they break the terms of their Declaration, they will be liable to the removal of their provisional citizenship and deportation to their country of origin, along with any dependents, subject to one appeal only."

UKIP's polling reveals that majority of people support UKIP’s principles, that 8% say they are close to voting or likely to vote for UKIP and a further 37% would consider voting UKIP but either don't know enough about the party or have not been offered a candidate.

Other points from UKIP's immigration policy:

* The existing laws regarding the application for political asylum will be enforced. Applications will only be considered at a British port or airport where the applicant has arrived directly from the country from which asylum is sought; or at the British embassy or consulate in that country – anyone who applies for asylum having come through a safe country will be immediately returned to that safe country or returned direct to their country of origin.

* Put in place border controls so that all non-UK nationals who enter the UK can be registered and tracked on their entry and exit from the country. Anyone overstaying their visa will be subject to arrest and removal from the country and will incur a ban on further entry to the UK for a minimum of five years

* Personnel and resources engaged in deporting failed illegal asylum seekers and illegal immigrants will be tripled in size

* Work permits will only be granted to workers who have a job and accommodation waiting for them, and who can financially support themselves or who will be accommodated or financially supported by their employer. This ‘No Home, No Visa’ policy will reduce the pressure on UK housing in short supply, and free up housing waiting lists for British citizens

* The UK will retain an open entry system and warm welcome for tourists from the EU and other countries as existing arrangements, but with proper border and security checks. Reciprocal arrangements for UK citizens visiting EU countries would be negotiated under the UK’s free trade agreement with the EU on regaining independence

* The UK would withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights

* The UK would fully apply the 1951 Convention on Refugees, particularly the clause on refugees having to accept asylum in the first safe country they reach.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:20 am

Heres Labours.

The protection of our borders is fundamental to the future of our country. We are committed to building on the progress we have made to create a system in which people can have confidence, which protects the security of the United Kingdom, prevents abuse of our laws, and is fair to both legal migrants and the British public. We are building an immigration system fit for the 21st century, one which benefits Britain.

Key Achievements:

* Asylum applications are at their lowest level for 14 years. The fall has been dramatic from over 80,000 asylum claims in 2000 to around 23,600 in 2006. In 2006, for the first time ever, we removed more failed asylum seekers than those making unfounded claims.

* In 2007, we removed an immigration offender on average, every 8 minutes.

* In April we launched the new UK Border Agency - a single border force combining immigration, customs and visas, with new police-like powers.

* We have tripled the number of staff who work on border control, and enforcement of Britain’s border controls now starts overseas. Since January 2008, we check everyone’s fingerprint before we issue a visa. So far we have enrolled over 1,000,000 people and have matched over 10,000 fingerprints in connection with previous immigration matters

* Since February 2008 rogue employers face civil penalties of up to £10,000 for each illegal worker they employ. Those found to have knowingly hired illegal workers can incur an unlimited fine and be sent to prison.

Winning the fight for Britain's future:

Labour knows that we all want strong borders and a fair deal. That is why in 2008, Labour is delivering the biggest changes to our immigration, citizenship and border security system for decades. Our changes include:

* A new Australian-style points system (which began in February 2008) to ensure only those migrants we need can come to work and study in the UK.

* A single border force to guard our ports and airports, with police-like powers for frontline staff

* Compulsory ID cards for foreign nationals who come here to work or study (starting in Nov 2008)

* New electronic border controls will be counting people in and out of the country by 2010

* In 2008 we will activate powers to automatically deport foreign national rule-breakers. We will confirm our targets to deport more foreign nationals prisoners than ever before. And we will expand our detention estate to lift the number of people we remove from Britain.

* We will introduce legislation to reform the immigration system and set out a new agenda of earned citizenship where the rights and responsibilities of becoming a British Citizen have to be earned. This will ensure that only those who share our values can earn the right to stay by clearly spelling out the rights and obligations of legal immigrants to Britain, as well as the requirements for earning British citizenship - including learning English, paying tax and becoming self sufficient and obeying the law. We will also ask new migrants to pay into a fund to help manage the transitional costs associated with migration.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:23 am

Conservatives,, blimey they are getting smaller:wah:

Immigration

Immigration can be a real benefit to the UK, but only if it is properly controlled with its impact on the economy, public services and social cohesion taken into account.

Our approach will ensure that we admit both the right people for our economy and also the right number of people. For economic migrants from outside the EU, we propose a two-stage process:

* The first stage is making eligible for admission those who will benefit the economy

* The second stage is an annual limit to control the numbers admitted with regard to the wider effects on society and the provision of public services

A Conservative Government would also apply transitional controls as a matter of course in the future for all new EU entrants.

To enforce such controls, and to prevent illegal immigration and combat criminals who compromise our security, we need a new, integrated approach to managing our borders.

So we will introduce a dedicated Border Police Force to bring together all the agencies responsible for border control.

Unlike Labour’s Border Agency, which does not even include the police, our force will have the power to stop, search, detain and prosecute the terrorists, traffickers and illegal immigrants who currently slip through the net. Only then will we be able to start making Britain safer.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:27 am

[QUOTE=kazalala;1203278]No one should be admitted unless they are fluent in English, have the required educational qualifications, demonstrate loyalty to the UK, its laws and values, and can support themselves financially, with no recourse to public funds – and this to apply equally to their dependents.

* The UK would withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights

QUOTE] I read it all and the one part that stands out to me is the part i've quoted. It is no different to which the BNP asks.

I think also, many people now distrust our politicians so much that we doubt every word that comes out of their mouths. I think UKIP are seen as just another bunch of promises with no real idea of weather they will keep them once in power. Opposition parties are notorious for making holloow promises and then once in, they introduce the hard line. Who is to say that UKIP can be trusted any more than our present government? The policy laid out on immigration could be just the sugar until they actually get in power and then votors find just as hard line policies introduced as the BNP.

Griffin speaks his mind although he makes an utter pillock of himself at times, but at least you know what exactly you are voting for when you vote BNP.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:28 am

FGS i cant find the Llib Dem Policies!!!!!!!!!:-5:-5

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:30 am

No one should be admitted unless they are fluent in English, have the required educational qualifications, demonstrate loyalty to the UK, its laws and values, and can support themselves financially, with no recourse to public funds – and this to apply equally to their dependents.

* The UK would withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights

Posted By Oscar, (sorry i mucked up the quotes).............

I read it all and the one part that stands out to me is the part i've quoted. It is no different to which the BNP asks.

I think also, many people now distrust our politicians so much that we doubt every word that comes out of their mouths. I think UKIP are seen as just another bunch of promises with no real idea of weather they will keep them once in power. Opposition parties are notorious for making holloow promises and then once in, they introduce the hard line. Who is to say that UKIP can be trusted any more than our present government? The policy laid out on immigration could be just the sugar until they actually get in power and then votors find just as hard line policies introduced as the BNP.

Griffin speaks his mind although he makes an utter pillock of himself at times, but at least you know what exactly you are voting for when you vote BNP.

erm yes:sneaky:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:34 am

kazalala;1203284 wrote: FGS i cant find the Llib Dem Policies!!!!!!!!!:-5:-5 I found part of one of Nick Clegg's speeches.

"A route of earned legalisation should be made available to those who have lived here unauthorised for many years. We would set stringent criteria – this is not a blanket amnesty – namely that the applicant should have lived in the UK for many years; should have a clean criminal record; and should show a long-term commitment to the UK. The applicant would be subject to a public interest test and an English language and civics test, and would be required to pay a charge. This would be of economic benefit too, with the exchequer estimated to be losing out on as much as £3.3bn in unpaid tax each year."

As i said, the mainstream parties dodged the whole issue during the Euro campaigns. It is only the fringe Parties that seem to want to address it head on because they know the mainstream reluctence to tackle immigration will gain them votes.

There is no hard line policy proposals by mainstream parties from what i can see. Their is no talk of a ceiling on immigration or the effect it has on policing, health, education and the infrastructure of this country.

I have some pretty frightening stats on UK mass immigration if you want them and no..... the source is not BNP.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:37 am

oscar;1203289 wrote: I found part of one of Nick Clegg's speeches.

"A route of earned legalisation should be made available to those who have lived here unauthorised for many years. We would set stringent criteria – this is not a blanket amnesty – namely that the applicant should have lived in the UK for many years; should have a clean criminal record; and should show a long-term commitment to the UK. The applicant would be subject to a public interest test and an English language and civics test, and would be required to pay a charge. This would be of economic benefit too, with the exchequer estimated to be losing out on as much as £3.3bn in unpaid tax each year."

Thanks ye i saw that somewhere too ,,, blooddy hell though we cant even find the policies!!! wth is all that about!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

would be interesting to hear what some other people thought of these policies,, as im a bit green as far as politics is concerned:o

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:41 am

kazalala;1203294 wrote: Thanks ye i saw that somewhere too ,,, blooddy hell though we cant even find the policies!!! wth is all that about!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

o No-body has actually found the Lib Dems themselves either, let alone their policies. :yh_rotfl

Where's Clodhopper when you need him? He's a Lib Dem.....

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:43 am

oscar;1203297 wrote: No-body has actually found the Lib Dems themselves either, let alone their policies. :yh_rotfl

Where's Clodhopper when you need him? He's a Lib Dem.....

Try Bristol:sneaky::yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:46 am

kazalala;1203301 wrote: Try Bristol:sneaky::yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl Very good Kaz...... yes I'm going to have to do something about all these Lib Dems that seem to have migrated into Bristol. Much more of this and i'll be moving back to Brighton with the Torie's.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:48 am

oscar;1203305 wrote: :yh_rotfl Very good Kaz...... yes I'm going to have to do something about all these Lib Dems that seem to have migrated into Bristol. Much more of this and i'll be moving back to Brighton with the Torie's.

Brighton is weird

you must fit in there very well:D

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:50 am

kazalala;1203309 wrote: Brighton is weird

you must fit in there very well:D
Yes, Brighton is weird in a gaymungalous way. :yh_rotfl

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:52 am

oscar;1203314 wrote: Yes, Brighton is weird in a gaymungalous way. :yh_rotfl

mind you ,, we stayed in a hotel on the brighton front for cheaper than a B&B at the lake district:rolleyes::yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:54 am

kazalala;1203316 wrote: mind you ,, we stayed in a hotel on the brighton front for cheaper than a B&B at the lake district:rolleyes::yh_rotfl Brighton is a posher version than Blackpool but indeed, one can holiday very cheaply there. Brighton is also famed for holding The Tory Party conferences. Please check the web before booking to avoid sharing your holiday with hoards of Tory tossers.

:D

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:57 am

oscar;1203318 wrote: Brighton is a posher version than Blackpool but indeed, one can holiday very cheaply there. Brighton is also famed for holding The Tory Party conferences. Please check the web before booking to avoid sharing your holiday with hoards of Tory tossers.

:D

:yh_rotfl well they did try to rip me off first but being a canny northerner i wasnt having it:p but it was interesting to say the least,, we were there a day after the fat boy slims concert where people died,,:-1 thank gawd we didnt go for that as we were going to but decided to stay another day at my sis in law in surry,,,

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

kazalala;1203323 wrote: :yh_rotfl well they did try to rip me off first but being a canny northerner i wasnt having it:p but it was interesting to say the least,, we were there a day after the fat boy slims concert where people died,,:-1 thank gawd we didnt go for that as we were going to but decided to stay another day at my sis in law in surry,,,

We are bred in Brighton to rip Northerners off at every opportunity. We only have to hear that accent and our charges go up 50% :yh_rotfl Glad you missed the bundle at the Fat Boy Slim Gig. Surrey is the home of El whopper and i believe land of Torie tossers also.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:03 am

oscar;1203327 wrote: We are bred in Brighton to rip Northerners off at every opportunity. We only have to hear that accent and our charges go up 50% :yh_rotfl Glad you missed the bundle at the Fat Boy Slim Gig. Surrey is the home of El whopper and i believe land of Torie tossers also.

I aint got a clue really where my sis in laws allegience lies

we dont really tak about politics,, we mainly talk about wine:D:yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:09 am

kazalala;1203328 wrote: I aint got a clue really where my sis in laws allegience lies

we dont really tak about politics,, we mainly talk about wine:D:yh_rotfl
Talk about wine or just generally 'whine' :wah:

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:11 am

oscar;1203330 wrote: Talk about wine or just generally 'whine' :wah:

talk about wine,,, then drink some wine,,, then whine:D

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:15 am

kazalala;1203332 wrote: talk about wine,,, then drink some wine,,, then whine:D In a grapetabulous type way :wah:

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:16 am

oscar;1203334 wrote: In a grapetabulous type way :wah:

Of Course! and its all in the name of charideee:D

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:18 am

kazalala;1203336 wrote: Of Course! and its all in the name of charideee:D
Come on mate..... you know i don't like to talk about my charideeeeee. Radio fab fm rockin :driving:

Let's rock !!

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:19 am

oscar;1203338 wrote: Come on mate..... you know i don't like to talk about my charideeeeee. Radio fab fm rockin :driving:

woopos my bad madey, Laters;):guitarist

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:30 am

kazalala;1203340 wrote: woopos my bad madey, Laters;):guitarist Laters :driving::driving: