davebrmm Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Who said they didnt give a damn ? because the west have given billions to Africa and their leaders have bought Hotels in France ,dozens of Rolls Royces and paid murdering thugs in their Army no children starved when Europe ruled Africa ---------- Post added 10-08-2013 at 10:54 ---------- You really do fit the profile of an out & out royalist, thick as pudding . You assume because I have no time for royalty or servile behavior that I'm a communist? What a clown . Communism is one of the daftest ideas ever thought up by man, goes against human nature & is completely unworkable as has been proved. For the last sixteen years of my working life I owned & ran my own company before selling it & retiring. Some Commie . For your information my not too bright friend I don't believe in any 'isms'. Capitalism, communism, fascism,monarchism all flawed. Capitalism was the one most likely to work as it does allow for human nature. Then the 'powers that be' in their wisdom decided to remove the one thing that kept it in check, the fear of failure. Bail out private speculation debt with public money. Brilliant idea! I ran my own building firm for years til I went bust don't lecture me you pompous pillock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 because the west have given billions to Africa and their leaders have bought Hotels in France ,dozens of Rolls Royces and paid murdering thugs in their Army no children starved when Europe ruled Africa ---------- Post added 10-08-2013 at 10:54 ---------- I ran my own building firm for years til I went bust don't lecture me you pompous pillock What the hell are you on about, lecturing you? Don't have a very good grasp of the English language do you? You come on here in response to a post of mine & open up with the expression 'shut it'. You then proceed to accuse me of being a communist based on nothing more than the fact I have little time for royalty or servility. My response merely pointed out that given my background accusing me of being a communist was ridiculous. You then respond to that by referring to me as a 'pompous pillock'. Anyone who knows me would agree that pompous has as much truth as communist where I'm concerned. Pillock on the other hand, like most people, occasionally. . As for lecturing you, well whilst I wouldn't presume to actually use the word 'lecture', I may be able to give you some advice on how to run a successful business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davebrmm Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 whats your background kind sir sorry if I upset you Iam touching my forelock ---------- Post added 11-08-2013 at 22:35 ---------- It's bizarre to me also taxman. The pretence of royalty is an affront to the dignity of the human spirit of everyman. All people are born pure, and equal. The notion of royalty is a divisive mechanism whereby a few people control and enslave the masses, and the masses lap it up! At least, that is how I see it. When the Europeans ran Africa it was the richest country in the world what happened ? ---------- Post added 12-08-2013 at 11:47 ---------- It's bizarre to me also taxman. The pretence of royalty is an affront to the dignity of the human spirit of everyman. All people are born pure, and equal. The notion of royalty is a divisive mechanism whereby a few people control and enslave the masses, and the masses lap it up! At least, that is how I see it. good joke that do you work for the B>B>C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banjodeano Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 whats your background kind sir sorry if I upset you Iam touching my forelock ---------- Post added 11-08-2013 at 22:35 ---------- When the Europeans ran Africa it was the richest country in the world what happened ? ---------- Post added 12-08-2013 at 11:47 ---------- good joke that do you work for the B>B>C I am struggling to understand your statements, they dont seem to make any sense to me...your quoting "Waldo"..then when you reply to him it is not relevant to what he said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 I am struggling to understand your statements, they dont seem to make any sense to me...your quoting "Waldo"..then when you reply to him it is not relevant to what he said I wouldn't worry so much (not that you are) about it. I'm starting to learn, it's way more trouble than it's worth, trying to understand some on here. I think they should introduce an IQ test, you have to get above a certain score, before you can join SF etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 Because in some cases they are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 A brick-layer has a son, the son has a genius IQ, however, because he is a brick-layers son, it stands to reason that he should be a brick-layer. A brain-surgeon has a son, this son is mentally retarded with a low IQ, however, because he is a brain-surgeons son, it stands to reason that he should also be a brain-surgeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 AH-ha! A bit of good old 1960's Labour Dogma. That was the sort of logic which Labour used to try to justify scrapping the 11+, wasn't it? 'Ordinary' children should go to secondary modern schools. - The children of Labour MPs should go to private schools, of course - because both they and their parents are special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 It's the exact same kind of dogma non-logic, that says the child of a monarch, should be a monarch itself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 It's the exact same kind of dogma non-logic, that says the child of a monarch, should be a monarch itself... It is the bloodline in the case of monarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.