Interact
Interact


This Tosser

Started by: chatty (7603) 

Thinks the poor souls in a towering inferno should have used their "common sense"


It's already been pointed out that the "common sense" thing to do was not cover buildings with
flammable cladding or cut emergency services to the bone.
There's a woman who lives a few miles down the road from this catastrophe who we are all chucking in for so she can have a £300 Million refurb.
I'm guessing she wont be having any 'flammable cladding'.

Started: 8th Nov 2019 at 12:59

Posted by: firefox (1734)


Interesting (and truthful)reading
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/toxic-regulations-not-the-fire-brigade-are-to-blame-for-the-grenfell-deaths/

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 13:07

Posted by: Anne (3790) 

Taking the compulsory emergency drill aboard passenger ships I have often wondered if it would be best to do my own thing in the event of sinking/fire etc. I normally book a high balcony cabin. If it meant using narrow enclosed corridors, interior stair wells in order to get to my assigned muster point which usually has no quick outside access would it not be better to stay on the balcony, or, do as instructed?
I think given certain circumstances common sense would prevail.







Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 13:43
Last edited by Anne: 8th Nov 2019 at 13:45:48

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Rees fogg.

Another knob wobbling tory twonk who should be consigned to join the rats in the nearest sewer cept the rats would leave in disgust .

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 13:50

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

I agree, Anne. I can't see me waiting for something to put me or my family in danger, I would act accordingly to get to safety. I was given this sense when born and won't hesitate to use it.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 13:55

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

I'm sure we would all 'act accordingly' and use our 'common sense' when sat on the couch mulling it over with hindsight.
Being trapped inside a raging towering inferno might make us act and think a little 'unaccordingly' especially the disabled or elderly.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 15:17

Posted by: whups (4647) 

maybe if you were at the top of a tower block& not in a downstair basement you might have second thoughts on running into it . but it just shows how much contempt the torys have for the common man & women.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 15:40

Posted by: Anne (3790) 

I was once on a ship when fire broke out, granted it was in dock at the time. the first thing I did was open the cabin door looked out then decided to stand on the balcony with the patio doors closed behind me. a number of other people were doing exactly the same thing looking down to where smoke was coming from. Nothing serious but who knows.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 16:41

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

From the official report,

Despite praising the bravery and commitment to duty shown by individual firefighters, Sir Martin said that this could not “mask or excuse the deficiencies in the command and conduct of operations”.

An analysis of the events on the night of the fire revealed a number of “significant systemic and operational failings” on the side of the LFB. These include the amount of time it took to override the ‘stay put’ policy. The report concludes that a decision to organise an evacuation could and should have been made between 1.30am and 1.50am and would likely have meant fewer fatalities. The report adds that the best part of an hour was lost before stay put advice was revoked.

According to Sir Martin, the early incident commanders failed to effectively seize control of the situation.

Meanwhile, those who were responsible for managing information from 999 calls failed to establish a clear system for receiving, recording and transmitting information, meaning much was left to the initiative and improvised methods of individual officers. The report brands this a “deplorable state of affairs”.

There are many reasons listed for the failures in communications, including problems with defective physical or electronic communication systems, which “significantly limited the efficiency of search and rescue operations inside the tower”.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 16:49

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Using the same title of another thread to suggest there is an equivalence between Mogg and corbyn is ludicrous.
Corbyn sympathises and supports people that would do this deliberately
Mogg just gave his opinion on what he would do in a certain situation

“I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do.”

I can't see anything nasty in that statement.
If you can leave the building then why stay put.
Remember:
Get out. Stay out

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 17:45

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

You may not have seen anything 'nasty' in that statement.
but on reflection Rees-Mogg did, hence:

"Mr Rees-Mogg "profoundly apologised" for his comments on Tuesday, saying: "What I meant to say is that I would have also listened to the fire brigade's advice to stay and wait at the time."

And so did that buffon Bridgen who tried to defend him but also ended up issuing an apology!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 17:54

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Yes, the man apologised, as good men do, regardless.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:16

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

And you just tried to defend him so.....?

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:24

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Your 'as good men do, regardless' bit.
Is that you saying he was actually in the right (or he thinks he's in the right) but being a 'good man' he apologised anyway?(especially with an election coming up).

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:28

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Go easy on him, Chatty.
He's not recovered from the last bout with you regarding the homeless. I think he's still in shock

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:35

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

To be honest I'm surprised he hasn't disputed it happening, with his track record.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:39

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

The homeless he left and went home after taking a photo to post on a website then salved his conscience by leaving a few bob for them. No common sense used on this occasion.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:39

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Being the good man that he is he left him a few bob.

Whats wrong with that?
Plenty wouldn't have!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:42

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Plenty wrong with it, it was payment for a photo so he could prove a point. He had no intention of helping the person or making sure they were safe, the photo was more important so he could cock stride on here with the "evidence" that there was a rough sleeper in town.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:46

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Are you sure?
Were you there to witness this?
Did you speak to anyone involved in this incident?
Have you any hard evidence to back your statement up?

Or, is it just your opinion?

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:51

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

The homeless he photographed to show all the naysayers that people are sleeping rough on our streets.
But guess what they still tried to deny it happening.
And they still seem to have their noses out of joint!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:52

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

common sense to flee a burning building thats this topic's question.
i for one would not have wasted my time in phoning the fire brigade,i would have ushered my precious one's out of that building as fast as i possibly could.
politicians these days dare not comment on such issue's for fear of an unwarranted attack on themselves.
i presume this ,it's only my viewpoint ,but i bet a considerable number ,if not all of those families minutes later where regretting the advice they where given.
whose responsibility it was to ensure the safety of the building should be brought to book.they failed in a most terrible way imaginable.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:54

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

You photographed instead of helping to prove your point like I said. Makes no odds how you try to make it look that's what you did. Just shows how concerned you are about the homeless. More of a concern to get one over on someone on WW more like. Well done you.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 18:59

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Part of the topics question was, why did the less well off end up living in a fire hazard, and why are vital services being cut to the bone?
You for one may 'not have wasted anytime' but plenty in that building were disabled and elderly, and may not have been able to get out under their own steam even if they had the chance!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:02

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Go fly a kite Tez.
Your mate Spangler was so adamant they didn't exist he made a special trip up town to photograph empty doorways.
Why on earth then would I not use photographic evidence to show he was talking absolute bollocks!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:08
Last edited by chatty: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:10:53

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

chatty
who knew it was a fire hazard ,surely the fire brigade issued a safety certificate.
someone somewhere must by law have carried out flammabilty test's.
i am elderly ,but i would still have fled as fast as possible.
what happened to the family of the flat whose fridge/freezer exploded/set alight ,who did they warn.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:28

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

If I was talking bollox why did you refuse to walk thru the town centre with me.
The offer still stands

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:31
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:32:35

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Not my mate, I don't know the chap.

What you did was obnoxious and you know it. So stop with the photographic evidence BS.

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 19:56

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Why the hell do I need to walk through the town centre with you, you are the one in denial.
Do you need someone to walk you past where Grenfel tower stood?

'Obnoxious' Tez?
Still ploughing on with your feigned indignation then!

bb I haven't a clue who "issued" what, but apparently there are still people living in similar identified blocks, why?
I'm quite sure you would have 'fled as fast as possible', but that's no consolation to people in wheelchairs housed in high rised deathtraps!

Replied: 8th Nov 2019 at 20:19
Last edited by chatty: 8th Nov 2019 at 20:27:43

Posted by: elmos (2784) 


This man not worth a toss.

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 09:07

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

"feigned indignation" Far from it disgusted to be honest, what you did was lower than low but what did you care, you got your spoils and that is all that mattered. Very Christian of you.

Several times now you have used the "feigned indignation" line to avoid the facts and ease your own actions, if it was feigned on my part believe me It would have been dropped by now. Just own up to what you did was very wrong as was the reason for doing it.

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 09:36

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

I took a photo get over it, and yourself!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 12:37
Last edited by chatty: 9th Nov 2019 at 12:41:53

Posted by: basil brush (13940)

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (391) Report abuse


Are you sure?
Were you there to witness this?
Did you speak to anyone involved in this incident?
Have you any hard evidence to back your statement up?

Or, is it just your opinion?


Well said s+b

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 13:00

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Chatty, you don't want to because you and I both know that I am correct.
You really are a stupid man, trying to argue with someone who knows far more about the situation than you do.

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 13:36

Posted by: whups (4647) 

you mean he squirmed out of it & did,nt have the decency to come & apologise himself & sent a deputy out instead.

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 14:04

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

You really are a stupid man, trying to argue with someone..

Am I thicker than the bloke who has been shown photographic evidence that he is wrong and yet is still denying the fact that he is wrong???
You've seen the photo? Please explain it way to me?


I don't "want to" because I don't need to!

What would it show if I went out with you and there was no one sleeping out on the streets that night?.... It would show there was no one sleeping on the streets THAT NIGHT!

What would it show if I went out with you and there was someone sleeping out on the streets that night?...It would show what I have ALREADY PROVED there are people sleeping rough on the streets!

No point you doing a King Canute impression and flapping at the waves, the tides already been in!
Close the stable door behind you on the way out....even though the horse as already bolted!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 14:23

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

The offer still stands.
Put up or shut up

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 14:28

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

I have put up, with photographic evidence!
Please explain said evidence away????????????

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 14:40

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I believe it was staged,
a walk thru the town centre on any night of your choosing eill solve it.
I'm there anyway so I won't be put out in any way shape or form.
Put up or shut up

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 14:50

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: chatty (6967)

"No point you doing a King Canute impression and flapping at the waves, the tides already been in!"

It would be a riveting night out with spangles scouring the streets of Wigan taking snaps of nothing. Especially when the only word in his voabulary is Corbyn!

I'd sooner paper a ceiling than turn out with spangles

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:20
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:21:43

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Of course, you wouldn't want to be proven wrong

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:22

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

s&b how come you've not asked chatty this concerning the canute statemen?

Are you sure?
Were you there to witness this?
Did you speak to anyone involved in this incident?
Have you any hard evidence to back your statement up?

Or, is it just your opinion?

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:30

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Of course, you wouldn't want to be proven wrong
YOU ALREADY HAVE!

I believe it was staged,
Do you really think I would bother going to any sort of trouble to make a (deceitful) point!

I can fully understand that you feel embarrassed by the fact you went out on a limb and was so adamant it wasn't happening but was proved wrong, and are probably thinking for you to have any credibility on here from now on that arguing the toss may save some face, but it is just making you look preposterous!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:52
Last edited by chatty: 9th Nov 2019 at 15:58:04

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Offer still stands
Put up or shut up

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 16:22

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Go away you silly fool.
You are like a wasp thats eaten too much fruit extract and is looking for someone to attack after being swatted off several times.

I thought you would have learned your lesson by now after the "swatting" Chatty has given you over the past few weeks!

Go away you pest

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 16:34

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Put up or shut up

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 16:37

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I'll shut up. As I think you have suffered enough. The "putting" has been "put" up. And you have been humiliated. There is nothing else to add.
Can you understand that?

Now slither off and find yourself a hobby. Theres a good chap

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 17:01

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I'll take that as a no

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 17:03

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Offer still stands
Put up or shut up


What am I "putting up"?
I don't need anything "offering"!

I don't need to be shown anything I know for a fact, I even have evidence.
You on the other hand are desperate to try and somehow claw a slither of credibility back, but you can't!
Everybody makes mistakes nothing wrong with that, when I do hold up my hand and move on.
But to keep on swearing Black is actually White when all the evidence proves otherwise really is making you look ridiculous!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 17:55

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Stay in denial then

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 17:58

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

I believe it was staged,

I resent that sentence more than your inability to admit you are wrong!
I have already stated in an earlier post that I would swear on oath in any court in the land but more than that I also swore on my children's lives it wasn't staged, so for you to still question my honesty puts you beyond contempt!!!!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:02

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Stay in denial then

And you my friend can stay looking like a clown with zero credibility!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:04
Last edited by chatty: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:05:16

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

As long as I know I'm right

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:09

Posted by: basil brush (13940)

😂😂😂@S+B

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:09

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

A clown with zero credibility who is beyond contempt!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:11

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

And you

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:17

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Have some charity chatty .

You are giving him one hell of a beating.

Clearly he gets riled when you miss .

What an hypocrite .
What a loser.








































Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:23

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

As long as I know I'm right

That's all that matters in your world, even when you're patently not!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:23

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

As I have stated grimshaw, I don't give a monkeys if he thinks the moon is made of green cheese, but to question my honesty is beyond contempt!

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:27

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I know I am, even made an offer to prove it.
Put up or shut up

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:34

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

It would 'prove' absolutely nothing.
The best it could 'prove' for YOU, is no one was sleeping rough THAT NIGHT.(You posted on numerous occasions that no one ever did)
You are obviously struggling to understand that point?

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:44
Last edited by chatty: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:47:38

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Whilst we're on about the homeless, I found this:

I asked my friend’s little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be Prime Minister some day. Both her parents, Labour supporters, were standing there, so I asked her, “If you were Prime Minister what would be the first thing you would do?”She replied, “I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.” Her parents beamed, and said, “Welcome to the Labour party!” “Wow…what a worthy goal!” I told her. I continued, “But you don’t have to wait until you’re Prime Minister to do that. You can come over to my house, mow the lawn, pull weeds, sweep my drive and I’ll pay you £25. Then I’ll take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out. You can give him the £25 to use toward food. ”She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work and you can just pay him the £25?” I smiled and said: "Welcome to the Conservative Party.”

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 18:45

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

What a load of tosh .

Grow up you turgid knob wobbler .

Throw in the towel before you suffer more embarrassment .

Replied: 9th Nov 2019 at 19:24

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Another in denial

Replied: 10th Nov 2019 at 13:35

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Back on topic:
"During Boris Johnson's time as London Mayor before the Grenfell blaze, he shut 10 London fire stations, sacked 588 front line firefighters and retired 27 engines.
When Labour Assembly member Andrew Dismore warned Johnson these cuts would cost lives they fell on deaf ears.
During that debate on fire cuts Dismore was told to 'get stuffed' by Johnson after he accused him of 'lying to the people of London in his election'"

Replied: 12th Nov 2019 at 16:20

Posted by: whups (4647) 

thats true chatty but what can you expect from a proven liar .

Replied: 12th Nov 2019 at 17:19

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

whups who lied about iraq having WMD and how many lives did that cost? take your time i'll wait...

Replied: 12th Nov 2019 at 17:47

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

not answering then whups...BUFFOON.

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 12:46

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I'll give whups his due, he isn't trying to excuse the inexcusable.
Even he must be appalled by Blair

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 13:04

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

@spangler.

Posted by: chatty (6995)

"During Boris Johnson's time as London Mayor before the Grenfell blaze, he shut 10 London fire stations, sacked 588 front line firefighters and retired 27 engines.
When Labour Assembly member Andrew Dismore warned Johnson these cuts would cost lives they fell on deaf ears.
During that debate on fire cuts Dismore was told to 'get stuffed' by Johnson after he accused him of 'lying to the people of London in his election'"

Surely you are appalled by Johnson?
Or are you in denial?

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 13:56
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 13th Nov 2019 at 13:56:52

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

s&b whose actions cost more lives blair or johnson? or are you in denial?

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 14:16

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

A Life is a life.
It matters not who cost more lives

If it could have been avoided, then people should be held accountable for their actions / mistakes.

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 15:34

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

In 2003 the fire service in England attended 473,600 fires. There has been a steady decline since then. In 2017 the number of fires attended was 162,000.
Today’s Private Eye notes,
The Grenfell inquiry chairman said the risks were known since at least the 1991 non fatal Knowsley Heights fire.
Lessons weren’t learnt from the 2009 Laksnal House fire in Southwark which killed 6 people.
One month before the Grenfell House fire the head of London Fire Brigade’s fire safety department wrote to London local authorities warning of the dangers of external fire spread in tall buildings.The letter highlighted the fact that external panels tested after the Shepherd’s Bush fire in 2016 did not meet the requirements of the building regulations in terms of combustibility. Yet very, if any, of the incident commanders or senior officers who attended the Grenfell fire were aware of the risks posed by exterior cladding.

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 15:47

Posted by: whups (4647) 

no mention of the then mayor of london boris johnson getting rid of 500 fire fighters & their depots ? .

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 16:40

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

After the event,
but still

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 16:52

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

The forest was shrinking but the trees kept voting for the axe.
For the axe was clever and convinced the trees that because his handle was made of wood he was one of them .

Ye olde proverb .

Replied: 13th Nov 2019 at 23:35

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)


A Life is a life.
It matters not who cost more lives

If it could have been avoided, then people should be held accountable for their actions / mistakes.


I couldn't agree more.
Let's start with Tony Blair

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 12:34

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You have a nerve spangles given you are a 22 carat hypocrite .
W W number one phoney .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 13:01

Posted by: firefox (1734)

A party only knows what the voters want by listening to the people, the labour party said they would honour the result of the Brexit vote and thought it best to ignore it, because they know what's best, and the voters are thick racists. They don't listen, and will pay the price.


Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 14:32

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Regardless of what you think I am
anthony charles lynton blair
is a war criminal responsible for over a million deaths, mostly civilians.
Let's start with him

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 14:45
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 14th Nov 2019 at 14:46:37

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

What has Blair got to do with the present Labour party,
spangler

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 15:54

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You are still a knobwobbling hypocrite spangler .

You always will be .

Woudnt want you alongside me in the trenches .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 16:30

Posted by: Handsomeminer (1604)

Another Tory with nowt say

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 16:35

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

You're right there grim, you wouldn't be in the British trenches, that honour belongs to people who respect democracy and their country.

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 16:44

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

I have news for you spangler .

I HAVE been in the trenches ,brit ones .

IN defence of the realm while you no doubt slept peacefully .
I maybe many things spangler .
But i am not a shallow minded hypocrite such as you .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 17:31

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

What was you doing in the trenches, calling them names, I bet there were a lot of hurt feelings

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 17:37
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 14th Nov 2019 at 17:37:43

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Go fly a kite phoney .

A shallow phoney tory .

Ex J C admirer .

Hypocrite .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 17:51

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

More name calling

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 18:34

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

posted by: grimshaw (1946)



"I HAVE been in the trenches ,brit ones .

IN defence of the realm while you no doubt slept peacefully "

Now then, spangler.
What have you got to say about that?
Maybe an apology

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 18:40
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 14th Nov 2019 at 18:40:44

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I don't apologise to the disrespectful

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 19:10

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

The more a society drifts from truth ,the more it will hate those who speak it .

Put that in your oh so shallow pipe spangler .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 19:46

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Remember this truth that cost the lives of more than a million

'Iraq can launch a WMD attack on Britain in 45 minutes'


Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 20:32

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Remember your previous posts phoney spangler .

Then deny your a shallow twonk hypocrite .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 22:31

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Grimshaw,
At long last this oft mentioned WORKING CLASS did something for me. A couple of tanners at 18/1. Free day.

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 22:45

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Nice one .

Replied: 14th Nov 2019 at 23:05

Posted by: whups (4647) 

sorry to correct you zz but 650 mps voted for that war so are they war criminals too ? .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 00:15

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Only the ones that were in on the lie

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 09:24

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

And btw it was 414 not 650

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 09:31

Posted by: basil brush (13940)

And I REALLY thought the heading was about one particular poster on here🤔🤔🤔

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 09:54

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

No basil it's not about you

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 09:57

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

posted by: grimshaw (1946)

"I HAVE been in the trenches ,brit ones .

IN defence of the realm while you no doubt slept peacefully "


Which ones?

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 10:01

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Go fly your kite spangler the hypocrite .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 14:59

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Which trenches have you fought in

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:01

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

All i am prepared to reveal twonk is it was in the Med .

Make of that what you will .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:32

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

You said you had news for me!
Well,
Which trenches have you fought in

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:33

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

I am not,repeat not, prepared to reveal more except it was many many moons ago so put that in your pipe and puff on it .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:42

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Nice and vague

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:49

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

If you say so hypocrite .
Now twonk off .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 15:57

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Trenches🙂

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 16:12

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

grimshaw, It wouldn't matter if you gave him name, rank and serial number, with a photo of you in hand to hand combat with a bayonet mounted rifle under your arm, he'd accuse you of 'setting it up'

A clown with zero credibility who is beyond contempt!

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:07

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Chatty,
Re the first paragraph, you are correct.
When you start running your mouth off about being in the trenches you must be prepared to back your mouth up.
I'm no expert but i'm sure that trench warfare went out 70 years ago

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:23
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:29:44

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

And I would also be right to say no matter what subject he 'backs his mouth up' on, or what evidence he provides you are just as likely to dismiss it!

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:43

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

No one can reject proof I certainly wouldn't, but I"m not holding my breath.
Still waiting to meet Corbyn

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:49

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You are spot on chatty .

In the trenches is a colloquialism .
Its saying i woudnt want to be alongside you in a battle .I clearly wrongly thought that was common knowledge but evidently not .

I have served in defence of the realm spangler to preserve your way of life .

Now trot along theres a good little hypo .

End of .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 18:52

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

"I have served in defence of the realm spangler to preserve your way of life ."

Then you follow a man who pays tribute terrorists who have disrupted our "way of life" by bombing and killing British soldiers and innocents on British soil. I think you are a bag of wind and full of it.

Tell ZS your rank, number and Regiment or Corps and where you have been deployed in the Med and for what emergency and prove to him it is so.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:11

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

No one can reject proof I certainly wouldn't,

WTF, the above post confirms you are either delusional, suffer memory loss or are a bare faced liar, or are a mix of the three!

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:13

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You are a bag of the brown stuff cherry b.

And full of it .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:31

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

As I thought just a Walt.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:35

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

AS i thought when you appeared .

A shallow twonk .

Scared sh.less to go confront the man you demonise at any opportunity .

Cherry no balls .

A 22 carat hypo phoney .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:42

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Regiment or Corps with your deployment to the Med details for ZS?

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:44

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Twonk off phoney .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:51

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Don't think I'm the phoney here "I have served in defence of the realm "

Details for ZS?

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 19:59

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

AS i thought when you appeared .

A shallow twonk .
Scared sh.less to go confront the man you demonise at any opportunity .

Cherry no balls .

A 22 carat hypo phoney


Please get me a meeting with him, I beg you,
I want to spit in his face.

And if your not prepared to back up your claims about your so called service record your even lower than I thought.




Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 20:18

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

I wouldn't bother with 'Details for ZS?' or to 'back up your claims' grimshaw, he forfeited that privilege the minute it became clear he dismisses anything that doesn't fit his agenda!

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 21:20

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

If he could provide his details he would because at the moment he looks like a Walter Mitty,
There is nothing he would like better than to wipe the smile of my face
but he won't because he can't.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 22:20

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You can get a word with him at any rally he attends .
just go and spit in his face you blatant hypo .You woudnt have the balls .

I dont need to justify myself to racist such as you who are beyond pathetic ,beneath contempt .

Go lick boris bog brush .You should be expert at that .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 22:35

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

It shows a lack of brains chatty when they think anyone would give such details of rank no etc etc and the theatre of engagement .Dumb dosnt begin to describe .

THEY are even thicker than i first imagined .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 22:41

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

.because at the moment he looks like a Walter Mitty,

Why would he gave a flying fig what you think he looks like.

"There is nothing he would like better than to wipe the smile of my face"

Why would 'a clown with zero credibility who is beyond contempt' have a smile on his face.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 22:51

Posted by: firefox (1734)

My first deployment was in the Falklands, my battalion 2 Para. We were the first in Port Stanley. We had air support from the Assencion isles by the RAF, my service number was **2904.
I was 18. I am proud to have served. I was 18years old + 1 day.
I had family members follow me in the services, sadly, I wish they didn't. My politics, liklke the majority of the Military, are no longer with the labour party.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 22:58
Last edited by firefox: 15th Nov 2019 at 23:01:14

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Well done you firefox .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 23:08

Posted by: firefox (1734)

|Thank you, sir.

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 23:09

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

I was a little before you but proud to serve .

Replied: 15th Nov 2019 at 23:11

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

It shows a lack of brains chatty when they think anyone would give such details of rank no etc etc and the theatre of engagement .Dumb dosnt begin to describe .

THEY are even thicket than i first imagined .


Details, ha ha ha ha

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 00:10

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

You're service is appreciated Firefox. Obviously you are far from lacking brains for sharing your service details with us.

It would seem that someone not wishing to share his must be one of those SAS types that doesn't want to be compromised. Or just stealing valour from those who have served, a despicable offence.


Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 08:10
Last edited by TerryW: 16th Nov 2019 at 08:25:28

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 09:07

Posted by: whups (4647) 

well well well it seems that the tory party is being funded by donations from russia . i wonder what the torys on here now think about their comments about the labour party being marxist ? . doesnt it make them hypocrites ? .

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 13:45

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Ask the Tories what they think if you know who they are. Labour aren't Marxists they are Tories pretending to be socialists and that's why you Whups are living the good life and continue to vote Labour, there is no other reason you do.

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 13:55

Posted by: whups (4647) 

what good life . no-one has had a "good life " since 2010 unless your rich. what about your heroes being sponcered by the marxists ? .

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:12

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Your good life. I have no political heroes sorry to disappoint you so I don't care who sponsors who to be honest.

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:19
Last edited by TerryW: 18th Mar 2020 at 10:25:31

Posted by: whups (4647) 

yes you have . you dont care because it shows your comments about labour being marxist to be hypocritical .

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:33

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Well who are my heroes?

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:35

Posted by: whups (4647) 

thatcher , major, johnson , farrage need i go on ?

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:38

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

It's no wonder you get laughed at.

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:42

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

Thought you was a big admirer of Thatcher anyway.

Replied: 16th Nov 2019 at 14:52

Posted by: whups (4647) 

you know it,s true & it,s your rhetoric that,s laughed at .

Replied: 17th Nov 2019 at 00:25

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

She fought for Britain, never been anyone of her calibre since.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 00:57

Posted by: whups (4647) 

and stuck it to the working classes .

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 11:57

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Maggie shut 1723 mines.

Callahan shut 1423 mines.

Wilson shut 2531 mines.

Who did more damage ?

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 12:08

Posted by: whups (4647) 

the torys because they shut them ALL. you could finish at 1 pit then walk down the road & start with another 1 when wilson & callahan where in charge , but thatcher shut them down out of pure spite .there was 200 yrs of coal at golborne so if there was so much coal why shut it ? .you forgot macmillan shut 246 pits & john major closed 55 ted heath shut down with harold wilson between them shut 253. i dont know where your information comes from because their was only 950 pits shut from 1947 - 94 . it makes your list ridiculous.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 12:39
Last edited by whups: 18th Nov 2019 at 12:40:33

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles

"Maggie shut 1723 mines.

Callahan shut 1423 mines.

Wilson shut 2531 mines.

Who did more damage ?"

You are talking utter, utter twaddle, spangler.
There is no way almost 5700 pits were closed down in 26 years. Can you supply evidence of this?

Where did you get that information from Fantasy Island

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 13:17

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

@spangler

If the above figures which you quoted are true
would you like a little flutter for charity or a good cause of say, £20? The loser will donate to a charity / cause of the winners choice.

If I win you donate it to the homeless or the Labour Party.
Ive not made my mind up yet!

Are you prepared to "put up or shut up"?
If I am wrong I will gladly pay up.
Will you?

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 14:02

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

ZB

Your data is a touch off course.
When the mines were nationalised the NCB took control of 958 underground mines and 60 surface mines employing 708,000 people and producing 200 million tons of coal. Mines employing 25 or fewer were left in the private sector.
In 1979 when Mrs. Thatcher came into office there were 219 underground mines and 106 surface mines employing 235,000 people and producing 123 million tons of coal. When she left office at the end of 1990 there were
104 underground mines and 130 surface mines producing 94 million tons of coal and employing 66,000 people.
In 1947 it took 708,000 people to mine 190 million tons of deep mined coal.
In 1990 it took 55,000 people to mine 75 million tons of deep mined coal.
Pit closures by PM and number per year in office,
Attlee 101 - 25 per year. Churchill 78 - 19. Eden 35 - 17. McMillan 246 - 41. Home 24 - 24. Wilson 235 - 39. Heath 26 - 6. Wilson 18 - 3. Callaghan 4 - 1. Thatcher 115 - 10. Major 55 - 8. Blair 12 - 1, Brown 1 - /. Cameron 5 - 1.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 14:09
Last edited by gaffer: 18th Nov 2019 at 14:11:37

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: gaffer (6151)

ZB

"Your data is a touch off course."

A touch!!
I'd say it was here to the moon off course!

spangler is that engrossed in his hatred for the Labour Party he resorts to telling fibs to discredit them

What was that noise? I'm sure I heard a keyboard and monitor being smashed up

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 14:26
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 14:28:08

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles

"Callahan shut 1423 mines."

"Wilson shut 2531 mines."

Now the truth!
Wilson closed 18.
Callaghan closed 4.

Not far out

I take it arithmetic is not your strong point?

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 15:09

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Wilson closed 18 in his second stint as PM and 235 in his first stint as PM according to Gaffers post.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 15:20

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

A total of 253.
2278 less closures as quoted by spangler
You could say he was a "touch" out with his figures

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 15:34
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 15:39:23

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Not to bad at maths, eyesight not as it was,

Thatcher closed 180

Wilson 290

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 15:45

Posted by: whups (4647) 

not bad at maths , YOUR HAVING A LAUGH .

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 16:10

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Sometimes I use my phone to post, it is frought with difficulties for me.
But I don't mind if you want to make an issue of it.
Notwithstanding my ealier entry, I'll just keep on posting boring old facts.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 16:32

Posted by: whups (4647) 

they wernt facts , they were a million miles off.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 17:02

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Aye alright blame your phone!
Just admit you are wrong quoting the above lies!
Nothing wrong with being wrong. Just man up and admit that you did not "read between the lines" when you sourced your information off google.

These are the figures for the Thatcher years:
I'll simplify it for you.

When she took over in 1979 there were 219 pits.
When she got launched out in 1990 there were only 65 left.

1979 .. 219

1980 .. 213

1981 .. 200

1982 .. 191

1983 .. 170

1984 .. 169

1985 .. 133

1986 .. 110

1987 .. 94

1988 .. 86

1989 .. 73

1990 .. 65

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 17:04

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

in 1900 wigan was full of pits,deep coal mining was on the slide possibly from earlier than 1900.an old tired dying industry.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:01

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

S&B
Now give us the figures from 1964-70

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:08
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:08:51

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Or shall I?

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:17

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I'll do it.
I don't trust you.

1964 545

1965 .. 504

1966 .. 442

1967 .. 406

1968 .. 330

1969 .. 304

That ok for you?
Ive managed to bring the figures down ( from your lie ) from 3954 to the Truth which is 241!
Bit of a difference Isn't there

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:46
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:49:18

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

S&B
these are in addition to the 18 he closed
1974-76

Wilson pit closures

1964 545

1965 .. 504

1966 .. 442

1967 .. 406

1968 .. 330

1969 .. 304



Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:54

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

The fact is Wilson closed far more mines than Margaret Thatcher.

So that myth has been laid to rest

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 18:59

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I give up with you.
You are dafter than what you think!

Those figures are not for pit closures per year.
They are how many were operating at the end of the year!
Can you understand that???

" Based on these figures from the government about 290 mines closed under Wilson in all his time in office, and about 160 under Thatcher. Because the figures are based on year end totals of pits operating, it’s not possible to be precise, but the relative scale of those numbers is clear."

From here.
https://www.conservativehome.com/leftwatch/2013/04/wilson-closed-more-coal-mines-than-thatcher.html

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:03
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:07:21

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

So according to the figure you yourself
Have posted

Wilson
545 - 304 + 18 = 259

Thatcher
219 - 65 = 155

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:08

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3771) [2,500+

"The fact is Wilson closed far more mines than Margaret Thatcher.

According to you he shut 2531!
I don't think you have recovered from the pasting Chatty gave you the other week.

So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as I don't think you are thinking straight

I give up with you.
You are one numbskull.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:11
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:12:49

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Ok now run along

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 19:48

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

ballcock

WILSON 290
THATCHER 160

do these figures back up ZS'S statement, labour closed more pits than the tories or does it not.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 20:02

Posted by: Jazzy (8654) 

Regarding Grenfell I worked for 10 years for Essex County Fire and Rescue Service. it was standard Fire Service advice in a tower block to stay where you are, unless you are on the floor with the fire, the floor above, or the floor below. This minimised the danger of overcrowding on the stairwells, and people being trampled. It was also so that fire crew are able too find you, and don't waste time looking for you if you subsequently decided to run for it. The London Fire Service had no idea the cladding would burn as it did, though that's another story. Having said all that, I would have got out, I wouldn't have waited.

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 20:11

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

@spangler
"would you like a little flutter for charity or a good cause of say, £20?"

I take that as a no. As you know you have posted incorrect information. And also an admittance of you posting lies.
Goodnight. William Liar!


Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 20:47
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 18th Nov 2019 at 20:48:30

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Can anyone enterpret S&Bs message for me

Replied: 18th Nov 2019 at 21:01

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

A Splendid Woman

Replied: 19th Nov 2019 at 13:08
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 19th Nov 2019 at 13:09:59

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

Can anyone enterpret S&Bs message for me

Had a word with Howard Carters great grandson and he reckons it roughly translates to you're....

"A clown with zero credibility who is beyond contempt"!

Anyhow in the interests of impartiality:

Replied: 19th Nov 2019 at 17:52

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Chatty..

Replied: 19th Nov 2019 at 18:47

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

She has achieved a lot
A grandad in the Lords pulling
strings and a multi millionaire daddy
That bought her into a safe
northern seat.
Not even a Wigan lass.

Not a candle to the grocers daughter.


Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 10:34

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I like Lisa Nandy. Lovely lady.

She does not close pits down.

maggie thatcher shut 1723 mines according to you.
Is that right, spangler?

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 18:19

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

You're on a sticky wicket there Spangler talking about people in politics who have 'achieved a lot' due to family wealth and connections.
20 of the 55 Prime ministers this country has had were educated at Eton, guess how many of them were Labour?

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 19:20

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

She ain't even had a proper job

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 19:26

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

maggie thatcher shut 1723 mines according to you.
Is that right, spangler?

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 19:30

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

She didn't close as many as wilson

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 19:55

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

maggie thatcher shut 1723 mines according to you.
Is that right, spangler?

Just answer the question!!
Did she or didnt she!
A simple yes or no will suffice

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:00

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

If you think you can win an argument by repeatedly refering to the effects of my disability, then that's ok.
It must be the only straw you can clutch at
You've posted the figures yourself.
Wilson closed more mines than Margaret Thatcher

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:07

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Is that a yes. Or, a no?

Labour closed mines on economic grounds. The Tories closed them as part of a political agenda.

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:10
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:12:19

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

It's a 'she didn't close as many as Wilson'

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:13

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

No where near as many as Wilson

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:13
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:15:12

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

OK.
How Many did she shut?
Was it 1723? Or, less?

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:20

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

By your own figures 155

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:22

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

By your figures, 1723
Ok. So you were were wrong quoting duff informaton regarding pit closures under Labour and the tories.

I'm glad you have seen the error of your ways and in a cryptic way you have admitted you were wrong

Fair play to you though. Even you make mistakes

Enjoy your evening

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:29

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

The partially blind usually do make mistakes

Replied: 20th Nov 2019 at 20:32

Posted by: whups (4647) 

but there was FAR more pits when wilson was PM . thatcher shut pits out of pure spite even when there was a couple of hundreds of years life in them.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 12:23

Posted by: TerryW (4285)

But the coal was cheaper elsewhere and mining here became uncompetitive, higher wages and unit costs was the reasons to import, not to mention new energy sources being brought in and not having to deal with strikes and having the country blacked out. The decline in mining started after the first world war when British coal exporting plummeted, so it would make no difference to mines and how many hundreds of years worth of coal they had. Economics pure and simple.

No one will pay dearer for stuff they want when they know they can get it cheaper elsewhere.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 13:11

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

Whups it’s not just about the number of pits closed. The more important figure is the rate at which the industry was being run down which is relative to the strain in finding alternative employment for the miners affected.
Harold Wilson oversaw a decline of 39 pits per year, Mrs. Thatcher 10 pits per year. For every miner looking for a new job in Mrs. Thatcher’s time there were 4 during the tenure of Harold Wilson.
Insofar as closing pits which had ‘200 hundred years life left’ it was irrelevant because the end was in sight for the UK market for coal for power generation. Events have proven that to be correct.
Your posts on coal and the NHS are driven by the dogma of the left which is as bad as the dogma of the right. The vast majority of the population generally settle for the middle ground which precludes a contribution from either left or right dogma proponents.
There are 4 million people on the NHS waiting lists. The Blair government tackled a similar situation by giving patients the choice of selecting a private provider but the continuous howls of privatisation has seen that facility quietly withdrawn except for a few exceptions. Mistakes were made in the rush to hand out contracts to private providers but these could have been corrected.
The NHS has never had the capacity to operate without a waiting list. The growth of the population over the past few years wasn’t foreseen by the long term planners in the higher echelons of the civil service, this has added a further complexity to the ability of the NHS to manage patient demand. For the NHS to perform with an insignificant length of waiting list it would need to have a continuous peak load capacity plus which would mean upping it’s staff and facilities by around 15 to 20% at a cost of £ tens of billions.
The middle of the road thinker would see no objection to using private sector capacity if it meant getting prompt treatment providing it was safe and effective.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 13:56

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Gaffer,
Would I be correct in saying that PFI payments are still a millstone around the neck of the NHS? Some horrendous repayments still due before the contracts are finished.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 14:35

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

chatty allways backs his mouth up does he? what about the 20 quid bet or the meeting with corbyn he promised?

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 15:01

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

Broady

The current annual PFI repayments are currently costing the NHS just over £2 billion a year. However, the hospitals with PFI schemes are crippled with the repayments. Relatively the worst affected is the Sherwood Forest group of 3 hospitals which sees 16% of it’s budget taken up by PFI repayments.
Barts in London pays annual charges of £116 million for a £1.2 scheme which will have cost over £6 billion when the scheme ends. The annual charge is 8% of it’s annual budget.
To put the £2 billion in perspective it would pay for quarter of a million hip operations per year.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 15:06

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3790)

"If you think you can win an argument by repeatedly refering to the effects of my disability, then that's ok.
It must be the only straw you can clutch at"

What disability? And when did I repeatedly refer to it?
I think you are clutching at straws now. You incorrigible fool

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 15:59

Posted by: whups (4647) 

WHO INTRODUCED THE PFI ? .

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 16:22

Posted by: broady (15832) 

John Major but the use of it accelerated quite a lot under the Blair/ Brown regimes. Figures are on google. Why are you Shouting?

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 16:28

Posted by: whups (4647) 

because it takes a 14lb hammer to get it into your head .and your insinuating it,s all labours fault when it was introduced by the torys & exploited just as much as labour.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 16:39

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Where did I insinuate it was caused by Labour? As soon as you asked me I replied who introduced it. Talking of 14lb hammers !!! Most of your comments are repetitive junk. Stick to Darts Weekly. Have you been out canvassing yet. You and Lily Allen would make a good pair.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 16:50

Posted by: whups (4647) 

really then why are they now talking in the press & media about the very things iv,e put on here ? .you & charlie corroli would make a perfect pair . maybe you can replace his mate paul the white faced clown .your comments should,nt ever be on here because these issues dont concern you do they runner.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 17:13

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Usual retort. Your lack of intellect clearly shows through. Maybe you should report my comments to the administrator. My advice would be stick to obituaries on the ????????? site.I often wonder, when you haven’t yet reached pension age, how you can spend so much time on here. Must have a good job. But then again I think we did read that your employment had been very sporadic over the last twenty years or so. Anyway, must be off to practice my circus act.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 17:29

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

how much is the great monument to lord smiff costing the taxpayers of WMBC,for the clueless its at the bottom of millgate.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 17:51

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

Whups

I don't think its Broady who needs the lump hammer.
John Major's government introduced PFI in 1992. It was little used in the NHS until Gordon Brown turbocharged the facility. To be paid for from the £60ish billion the financial sector was divvying up every year in taxes.
The chart from the National Audit office spells it out.
George Osborne tinkered with it to reduce costs and Philip Hammond put a stop on PFI deals for the foreseeable future.


Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 20:20

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

broady
your wasting your time trying to persuade whups what the facts and figures are,he would not recognise them .he would merely say it was tory party propaganda.
he is dyed in the wool red,why let the truth get in the way of his blinkered 19th century mindset.
me dad voted labour and it's good enough for me.

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 23:15

Posted by: whups (4647) 

especialy when there a pack of lies from a dodgy web site . what makes you think gaffers facts are right ? . iv,e said on many occasions that his facts dont hold water & when i put on about nurse shortages being around 40,000 he said it was rubbish & around 20,000 , now the figure is now between 33 - 43,000 . i put on about the torys having meetings with large drug cartels from america which will put up the NHS drug from 18 billion to 45 billion , an increase of 27 billion he said it was poppycock . this very suject has been talked about tonite on question time & highlighted my very argument . as for being blinkered you take the cake as your prepared to believe anything & everything this guy gaffer says & puts on .

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 00:28

Posted by: broady (15832) 

The people will decide in the near future. It must be terrible to be unable to grasp figures off an independent government site UNLESS of course it coincides with your own views.

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 01:31

Posted by: whups (4647) 

which can be doctored ? .

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 12:19

Posted by: broady (15832) 

But only by the Tories I presume. These figures are produced year on year, irrespective of the Government, so questions can be asked in Parliament. Who, besides your good self, decides what's doctored and what isn't?

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 12:25

Posted by: whups (4647) 

broady it,s all over the news & media the things i,m on about you cant get away from it . brought up in the commons, on tv programs & question time . how much more proof do you need & i,m convinced that gaffer never reads a paper or watches the news. you think that gaffer is some sort of god with his supposed facts & figures which he gets from some website , what makes him right when that data can be fake news or doctored ? .why would the torys change the habit of a lifetime & not want the NHS after every tory government has chipped away at it to the point that it now is on course for implosion & they try & justify it by saying how much money they put into it . 6 meetings the torys have now had with big drug cartels from the USA which WILL put 27 billion on our NHS drug expence , which this price will not go down because trump is adamant that any deal on drugs they will pay the same as any american .it wont affect you but it will affect me & millions of others & that,s why you & other ex pats should not have a vote that can have a devastating effect on peoples lives still here.and yes it,s just the torys because it,s they that wants a privatised NHS & if they get in (with your vote)i,m sure that,s what will happen.

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 12:58

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Roll on the election. I repeat I WILL NOT exercise my democratic right to vote. If what you say is correct ( highly unlikely) then Labour will be returned with an overwhelming majority. You seem to be obsessed with Gaffer because he produces facts using his experience. If I wanted to know a 164 checkout I would ask you as a former top player BUT if I want to hear about the NHS i’m afraid it would be someone that has been actively involved.

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 13:17

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

Whups

Philip Collins, a member of Tony Blair’s team in Downing Street, writing in today’s Times.

Of the 119 years that have elapsed since Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office and 13 of them were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31 elections and Labour have won a working majority just five times. Yesterday, with the publication of the Labour manifesto , we saw why.

It’s quite clear that the thinking of people like you has kept Labour out of office so many times because it’s light years from the centre ground where the vast majority of the voting population stand.
If you think I’ve fabricated the above you can buy a copy of the Times and read it. Similarly you can go to the National Audit Office website and check the chart I posted above.
In the UK there are 414,000 nurses on a full time equivalent basis. At any one time vacancies due to childbirth, ill health, nurses leaving,retirement and early retirement leave temporary and permanent vacancies for over 20,000 nurses. Since 2010 the population growth has outstripped the number of training places for nurses by around 4% thus creating further vacancies. Brexit has also affected EU recruitment of nurses.

Replied: 22nd Nov 2019 at 13:34

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Angela Rayner was ridiculed by Twitter users after praising the UK Government in 1996. The Labour MP for Ashton-under-Lyne said as a young mum at 16 in 1996, she had a council house “waiting for her” and was able to “get back” into secondary education. Speaking on Good Morning Britain, the Shadow Education Secretary said: “I was a young mum at 16 in 1996 and I had a council house waiting for me to help me.
“I was able to get on back into secondary education, I didn’t have to worry about tuition fees at the time.
“And there was a national health service that was there for me.”

Replied: 23rd Nov 2019 at 11:10

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

And

Oh. Whilst I'm here. What's the weather forecast in the Daily Express?

Replied: 23rd Nov 2019 at 18:17
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 23rd Nov 2019 at 18:18:18

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

some ears will never hear and some eyes will never see,thetruth.

Replied: 23rd Nov 2019 at 18:34

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

And some people ( sadly ) are beyond contempt

Replied: 23rd Nov 2019 at 19:32

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Stop beating yourself up

Replied: 23rd Nov 2019 at 21:06

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

"What disability? And when did I repeatedly refer to it?"

When you are ready. At least have the decency to reply to the above!
I would prefer a straight answer. Thank you. Not lies. If you are capable of telling the truth

Replied: 24th Nov 2019 at 20:59

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

Sight issues due to diabetes

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 14:11

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

And when did I repeatedly refer to it?

Feel free to copy and paste any "repeatedly referring" comments of mine regarding this issue

How could I possibly repeatedly refer to it when I knew nothing about it

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 14:38
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 25th Nov 2019 at 14:40:25

Posted by: builderboy (2216)

I can vouch for the validity of what ZS has just written. I was present at the time he collapsed and had to be taken away in an ambulance .

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 14:41

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I'm not disputing that, Builderboy. Far from it.
What I am disputing is the fact the he accused me of

"If you think you can win an argument by repeatedly refering to the effects of my disability, then that's ok."

I knew nothing about it!

He added up all the figures correctly But in his haste to try and have a go at the Labour Party he "thought" that the figures were how many pits were closed under the Labour party. And he was way off The figures were for the decline of the pits year by year. Not the total that were closed down under any government.

Then he realised he had made an error. But refused to admit it. Instead, he blamed his sight and then accused me of the above instead of admitting he was wrong



Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:06
Last edited by Salmon & Ball: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:08:58

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Salmon and Ball,
I have never seen you mention his disability. As you say he should just have said “ Oops, Sorry my error” End of story.

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:10

Posted by: builderboy (2216)

No argument from me. I haven’t been following the gist of the argument and have no particular axe to grind against posters. I was merely pointing out that ZS does indeed have serious eyesight issues.

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:37

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Thank you, Broady

I really, really appreciate that comment

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:39

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

The gist is, Builderboy. He dropped a major clanger in his post. Nothing to do with his eyesight, he got his "facts" wrong.
Instead of admitting that he made a howler he decided to blame his eyesight and then accuse me of mocking his disability

All he needed to say is what Broady posted. That would have been end of story

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 15:44

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

It is end of story,
Mistake or no mistake,
you're just trying to milk it as much as you can to deflect
from the fact that
Thatcher closed less mines than Wilson,
a lot less

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 16:06
Last edited by Zanzibar Spangles: 25th Nov 2019 at 16:08:04

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles

"Mistake or no mistake,"
"you're just trying to milk it as much as you can to deflect"

The irony of that!
It was a mistake ( a massive one ) on your part.
You are not man enough to hold your hands up and say, sorry I was wrong.

You went for the sympathy vote and blamed your mince's.
How's that for milking it

You are beyond contempt and are a stubborn, incorrigible liar. It's there for all to see on this thread.
Even a guy in Canada has backed me up on this thread. You are total disgrace

That is my last word on this thread concerning you. You are not worth replying to.


Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 16:32

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

I gave a reason for my mistake, it has nothing to do with sympathy, that may be what you would do but don't think everyone has your mindset.

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 16:58

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (665) 

I was not going to reply to you again on this thread. But after your last comment, I could not resist.


"I gave a reason for my mistake"

You have never admitted that you made a mistake!
But you have now
Why did you not put your hands up before instead of throwing spurious allegations at me? That clears this up.

End of story. Enjoy your evening

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 17:25

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

None of my allegations were spurious

Replied: 25th Nov 2019 at 17:32

Posted by: whups (4647) 

you just cant admit that it,s now 40,000 + nurses . and it,s now common knowledge that tory ministers have been having meetings with giant US drug cartels ,.wots it going to take for you to open your eyes to whats going on . you called it "utter tosh" when i put it on here months ago , but now it,s comming true. it will implode the nhs & ALL those who now get free prescriptions will have to pay.how great is that & how r u going to explain your statistics then ? .

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 12:49

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Well said whups .

Absolutely spot on.

The tory twonks will be first to cry when appointments to get a doctor will be charged .
My nephew is a doc in a huge yorkie hospital .
He has me in tears when describing what is going on .

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 12:59

Posted by: firefox (1734)

Posted by: Salmon & Ball (447) View Salmon & Ball's page100+ Report abuse

"I was not going to reply to you again on this thread. But after your last comment, I could not resist."


Quelle surprise

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 12:59

Posted by: whups (4647) 

why would the torys change the habit of a lifetime & care about the NHS & bang on about how much money they put into it while all the time eroding it . weekend work by doctors is taxed so high they are refusing to work week-ends & this was brought in by jeremy hunt & forced contracts on junior doctors . it makes me wonder if those on here want an NHS & the torys are exploiting brexit to get in .the torys will no doubt come back with a deal with the yanks that will surely implode our NHS & all those who are currently getting free prescriptions irrespective of age or illness will start having to pay for them.i know this much that if they get in again under the brexit smoke screen that you can all say goodbye to the NHS.

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 16:57

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

Terrific whups .

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 17:14

Posted by: broady (15832) 

grimshaw,
25/1 on a labour majority. Worth a few sovs would you think. 4/9 on Tory majority.

Replied: 27th Nov 2019 at 18:08

Posted by: whups (4647) 

funny isnt it grim that the very thing iv,e been on about is plastered all over the media ? .

Replied: 28th Nov 2019 at 11:12

Posted by: grimshaw (2191) 

You are spot on whups ,it is a smokescreen.
Trouble being the twonks are so blinded and treating the election as a one issue election namely brexit rather than see the big picture .

The idiot twonks are amongst us whups and the scariest thing is they have the vote .
Working class tories .A contradiction in terms .
Working class tories .
Do me a favour .

Replied: 28th Nov 2019 at 18:51

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Conservative Working Men’s Club very near to Golborne Pit if I remember correctly.

Replied: 28th Nov 2019 at 19:02

Posted by: Zanzibar Spangles (3914)

The idiot twonks are amongst us whups and the scariest thing is they have the vote

Very revealing,
the inference is crystal clear


Replied: 28th Nov 2019 at 20:13

Posted by: baker boy (15437)

the big picture ?

Replied: 29th Nov 2019 at 19:54

Posted by: tonker (21599) 

Replied: 29th Nov 2019 at 20:12

Posted by: whups (4647) 

wrong again broady . the labour club was the nearest as we parked cars on there & walked thru a swing gate str8 into the canteen . the tory club was around 300yds from the pit.

Replied: 29th Nov 2019 at 22:48

Posted by: broady (15832) 

What are you on about again? I said VERY NEAR and never implied it was nearer than the labour club. You want to start reading things properly before gobbing off. Now away and knock on a few doors.

Replied: 29th Nov 2019 at 22:57

Posted by: whups (4647) 

the tory club isnt very near the pit is it.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 00:28

Posted by: broady (15832) 

What is it a bus ride away? I probably lived nearer to Golborne than you. I hate to reveal this to you but the pub was full of miners and we got on quite well.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 01:13

Posted by: whups (4647) 

it doesnt matter . it wasnt near the pit.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 02:18

Posted by: broady (15832) 

Message removed as on reflection I do not even know why I waste my time reading this buffoon’s comments. Same old twaddle day after day.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 02:28
Last edited by broady: 30th Nov 2019 at 08:52:33

Posted by: gaffer (6379) 

Broady

At least his initials are in line with what he posts.
BS = Bull S***.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 12:07

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (4918)

Well I am still in shock

Finding out that Whupsy is a scouser, and he used to live next door to Ken Dodd



That is why he votes Labour

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 13:00

Posted by: whups (4647) 

i guess your talking about yourselves broady & gaffer. still no word from you gaffer on the number of nurse shortage & i think i,m nearer the figure than your 20,000 . and no word of the NHS sell-off by the torys i see which you also ridiculed ? .and 1stroke ken dodd was a far better man that you,ll ever be & the pic on the very 1st comment is why you support who you do.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 14:37
Last edited by whups: 30th Nov 2019 at 14:39:43

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (4918)

Well since he dropped that enormous bollock about which this topic is about, they have kept Jacob Reec-Mogg well out of the way, and to folk in places like Wigan, a person like him he is very toxic, born with the old silver spoon in his mouth, and also, what has happened to our 'Lisa (my face is never off the gogglebox) Nandy' she has disappeared, which makes me think that Labour are worried that Wigan will go to the Brexit Party, so they don't want her upsetting any of the 60 odd percent leaver voters in this town, and by keeping her out of the way, they are hoping that the traditional Labour vote will come through in Wigan, which I think it probably will do .....

But Whupsy, how far left do Labour have to go for you to start questioning whether or not they are the party for you, because what happens is that they take control of the states assets, then they take control of the state media, then they take control of the police and military, and the rule of law which applies to all, then does not apply to the government, and then they take control of the people, and then it has become an authoritarian state, a communist dictatorship, and they then eliminate people who oppose them, by using death squads to kill them ....

Is that what you want to happen Whupsy ?

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 15:19

Posted by: broady (15832) 

The Conservatives should have ducked out of Wigan. No candidate.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 15:36

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (4918)

Well they have one in Makerfield.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 15:40

Posted by: chatty (7603) 

laughing stock (Far too many posts)
chatty allways backs his mouth up does he? what about the 20 quid bet or the meeting with corbyn he promised?

Replied: 21st Nov 2019 at 15:01


What the hell are you talking about, completely lost the plot again.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 16:24

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

i thought you meant grimshaw always backs his mouth up..

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 17:36

Posted by: laughing gravy (6023)

why are you again dodging questions?

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 17:37

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (4918)

Broady:

"The Conservatives should have ducked out of Wigan. No candidate"

Yes they have got a Candidate in Wigan.

List of Wigan Constituency Nominees

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 18:57

Posted by: broady (15832) 

TTS,
What I meant they shouldn't have fielded a candidate. If they have left a straight fight between Labour and Farage's party Labour MAY have lost. The presence of a Conservative candidate will split the anti Labour vote. Lots of disenchanted Labour supporters won't under any circumstance vote Tory.

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 19:27

Posted by: Tommy Two Stroke (4918)

Oh bugger

I read it wrong

Replied: 30th Nov 2019 at 20:14

Posted by: whups (4647) 

how far right do you want to go 1stroke ? .

Replied: 1st Dec 2019 at 00:19

 

Note: You must login to use this feature.

If you haven't registered, why not join now?. Registration is free.