20 hours ago, Bobthegimp said:

The Brits need to take a pyrethrin bath and rid themselves of the blood sucking parasites they call 'Royalty'. Seize all of their lands and banish them to Pattaya where they can rub shoulders with the riff raff and be fondled by men in dresses. 

Is this to take place before or .... after Trump + First Lady visits next month?

8 minutes ago, Jim Blue said:

Is this to take place before or .... after Trump + First Lady visits next month?

 

It's coming for all of them. That's behind the push for AI and the boom in bunker construction. 

13 hours ago, proton said:

 

Willie the woke, not likely an improvement

Charles made his choice with Camilla.  She can't be held responsible. How many of us have made bad relationship choices?

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Ricky Jones can. He's Labour and a minority.

 

Lucy Connolly cannot. But she's a white Tory.

 

The tyranny of Labour’s 2 tier Britain exposed for all to see. Again. More obvious than ever before. 

 

Maybe read this and educate yourself 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ricky-jones-cleared-lucy-connolly-jailed-b2808629.html

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

It's funny to see you gloating about the 2 tier system though.

 

Jones seems to be a nasty piece of work but a jury acquited him. What do you want? A retrial until you get the correct verdict?

 

Where am I gloating about anything? That's right, I'm not.

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

You'll be whining like the American Libs when it backfires and Farage or Lowe is elected.

 

If there's one thing that you can teach me, it's how to whine. In fact, you could probably teach a wail of banshee how to whine.

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Same as you still cry about Brexit.

 

No crying from me. Just a reminder of the utter foolishness of Brexit every time you mention it.

 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Your ilk never learn. 

 

 

Always nice to end of a point of agreement.

9 hours ago, RayC said:

Maybe read this and educate yourself 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ricky-jones-cleared-lucy-connolly-jailed-b2808629.html

 

This part says it all really. 😃

 

 

This part is inaccurate.

 

 

It is inaccurate because she didn't call for anyone to do anything. She said if someone else did it, she wouldn't care. Big difference. If I say to you "Eat salad for dinner for all I care" I am not calling for you to eat salad. I am saying I do not care if you eat salad or not. 

 

So he got nothing for calling for throats to be slit, she got multiple years in jail for saying if someone else did something she wouldn't care.

 

"Yes move along swiftly please. No 2 tier justice to be seen here". 😃

 

Enjoy it while it lasts though. This is money in the bank for Labour's opponents. You can see the Harris/Trump result duplicated with Starmer/Farage. Looking forward to more Liberal tears. 

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

This part says it all really. 😃

 

 

This part is inaccurate.

 

 

It is inaccurate because she didn't call for anyone to do anything. She said if someone else did it, she wouldn't care. Big difference. If I say to you "Eat salad for dinner for all I care" I am not calling for you to eat salad. I am saying I do not care if you eat salad or not. 

 

So he got nothing for calling for throats to be slit, she got multiple years in jail for saying if someone else did something she wouldn't care.

 

"Yes move along swiftly please. No 2 tier justice to be seen here". 😃

 

Enjoy it while it lasts though. This is money in the bank for Labour's opponents. You can see the Harris/Trump result duplicated with Starmer/Farage. Looking forward to more Liberal tears. 

 

The pertinent facts, which you seem to ignore, are 1) Connolly plead guilty and was therefore sentenced without the need for a trial and 2) Jones opted for a trial, pleaded 'Not guilty' and was acquitted by a jury of his peers (Incidentally, what's the chances of 12 randomly selected individuals all having the same political views? Pretty slim, wouldn't you agree?)

 

Now you may consider Connolly's sentence excessive, and you might consider the verdict reached in the Jones trial to be the wrong one, but that is merely your opinion. In both cases, due process was followed.

 

What we have here is not an example of a 2-tier justice system, but further evidence of your sense of grievance which seemingly knows no bounds.

 

What would you do now? Order retrial(s) of both cases until the 'correct' verdicts were made?

16 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Ricky Jones can. He's Labour and a minority.

 

Lucy Connolly cannot. But she's a white Tory.

 

The tyranny of Labour’s 2 tier Britain exposed for all to see. Again. More obvious than ever before. 

 

It's funny to see you gloating about the 2 tier system though. You'll be whining like the American Libs when it backfires and Farage or Lowe is elected.

 

Same as you still cry about Brexit.

 

Your ilk never learn. 

 

 

Personally I hope Lowe gets in so we can end this scourge of charity rowers! The man is a slug.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/aug/08/rupert-lowe-gives-charity-1000-after-taking-its-rowers-for-immigrants

 

On 8/19/2025 at 1:46 PM, RayC said:

 

The pertinent facts, which you seem to ignore, are 1) Connolly plead guilty and was therefore sentenced without the need for a trial and 2) Jones opted for a trial, pleaded 'Not guilty' and was acquitted by a jury of his peers (Incidentally, what's the chances of 12 randomly selected individuals all having the same political views? Pretty slim, wouldn't you agree?)

 

Now you may consider Connolly's sentence excessive, and you might consider the verdict reached in the Jones trial to be the wrong one, but that is merely your opinion. In both cases, due process was followed.

 

What we have here is not an example of a 2-tier justice system, but further evidence of your sense of grievance which seemingly knows no bounds.

 

What would you do now? Order retrial(s) of both cases until the 'correct' verdicts were made?

 

Yes Ray. Jury's never get it wrong due to political pressure, the handling of the trial by biased judges and the careful selection of jurors. 😄

 

Likewise, nobody has ever been pressured into pleading guilty on the promise of a light sentence only to be screwed over later.

 

The fact that you go out of your way to gloat about a man being found not guilty for encouraging/inciting others to slit the throats of political opponents (captured on video) while celebrating a mother being separated from her daughter for 3 years for a Facebook post tells me everything i need to know about you.

 

I honestly struggle to understand your ilk.

 

 

On 8/20/2025 at 2:41 PM, JonnyF said:

 

Yes Ray. Jury's never get it wrong due to political pressure, the handling of the trial by biased judges and the careful selection of jurors. 😄

 

Likewise, nobody has ever been pressured into pleading guilty on the promise of a light sentence only to be screwed over later.

 

(Once again, apologies for the delay in replying but I am definitely not letting these false accusations go unanswered).

 

Any concrete evidence for that in either of these cases, Jonny?

 

If not, it is an excellent example of conspiracy theory.

 

On 8/20/2025 at 2:41 PM, JonnyF said:

The fact that you go out of your way to gloat about a man being found not guilty for encouraging/inciting others to slit the throats of political opponents (captured on video) while celebrating a mother being separated from her daughter for 3 years for a Facebook post tells me everything i need to know about you.

 

I stated previously that imo, "Jones appears to be a nasty piece of work": I have made no comment about Connolly - or her sentence - other than to highlight the legal differences between her case and that of Jones.

 

Given that, how anyone in their right mind think that I have "gone out of my way to gloat ..." beggars belief.

 

The fact that you feel the need to resort to bare-faced lies speaks volumes about your character 

 

On 8/20/2025 at 2:41 PM, JonnyF said:

I honestly struggle to understand your ilk.

 

 

That is no surprise. My "ilk" realise that we are all subject to bias, but try to suppress these biasses, consider the facts on merit and then reach an informed decision.

 

On the other hand, you appear to view everything in black and white terms; 'X' good, 'Y' bad. with no grey areas. Facts can be disregarded as necessary.

On 8/18/2025 at 9:05 PM, Bobthegimp said:

 

I'm a colonial.  Our PM ran your central bank, probably into the ground if his current performance is any indication. 

 

He had a good go at it. Useless.

I couldn't find the "urgent warning".

On 8/19/2025 at 1:56 PM, josephbloggs said:

Personally I hope Lowe gets in so we can end this scourge of charity rowers! The man is a slug.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/aug/08/rupert-lowe-gives-charity-1000-after-taking-its-rowers-for-immigrants

 

 

 

"If these are illegal migrants, I will be using every tool at my disposal to ensure these individuals are deported,”

On 8/18/2025 at 12:36 AM, Bobthegimp said:

The Brits need to take a pyrethrin bath and rid themselves of the blood sucking parasites they call 'Royalty'. Seize all of their lands

 

Britain has played with being a Republic and getting rid of royalty in the 1650's. 

Lasted about 5 years. Then they decided that a parliamentary democracy with a monarch was a better choice in about 1660. Been so ever since.

 

The younger experiment with Republicanism isn't doing so well.

To return to the original topic, VJ Day and the King's speech. The King doesn't write his speeches. These are crafted and approved by the government of the day.

 

By all accounts, in parts of the Commonwealth, parts of his speech went down like a lead balloon. Whatever the troops were fighting for in Europe, in Asia-Pacific, they were not fighting for "freedom". The British troops were defending British rule, not bringing freedom. Nothing was promised to those liberated territories. In India. the INA (the India army that was formed from POWs by the Japanese) is remembered rather differently from the UK. That doesn't mean approval of the Japanese, but rather the Japanese offered an opprtunity for India, Malaya, Indonesia and Indo-China to break away from their colonial masters. It no surprise that at the end of the war, the various resistance groups were well armed and highly motivated to take over. The Dutch were shocked that the Indonesian Nationalists had an air force. Vietnam had Ho Chi Minh, and in Malaya, the heart of the Communists were the Chinese

 

My Grandfather was captured at Singapore. His war was a bit unlucky. He was a Regular, due to the Great Depression, a Sapper. Evacuated from France at Cherbourg. Reformed, reequipped at Halifax, shipped with the 18th Division bound for North Africa. At Capetown, diverted to Bombay, then Singapore. 2 weeks after he arriv ed, Singapore capitulated.

 

Most Britons and Australians will know about the Burma-Siam Railway (my Grandfather thought the film was an utter travesty, yet most people fondly remember it now). Most Americans will know about Bataan, and maybe a bit about Japan.

 

When Singapore surrendered, the British/Australians outnumbered the Japanese 3 to 1. Some of my Grandfather's recollections are perfect examples of the fog of war. He didn't think much of the Australian troops, calling them cowards, and getting drunk in the final hours. He accused them of running from the enemy and throwing down their weapons and kit. What he didn't realise was that Australia's most experienced troops fought a rearguard action down the Malayan Penninsular, and at the end, it was every man for himself, as they had to swim over to Singapore. What he saw was these men, having lost their uniforms and rifles emerging from essentially swamplands. As for the drunken Australian troops, these were troops barely out of basic who had just arrived. In Australia, they had to drill with sticks as there were insufficient rifles. They were very badly led.

 

The Japanese had seized the water supply and were using air burst bombs in Singapore. The city was hell on earth, with bodies, many decapitated, lying in the streets. The whole defence had been crippled thanks to a New Zealander, in the Indian Army, seconded to the RAF. He had been passed over for promotion, and subsequently passed to the Japanese the location and details of every airbase in Malaya. He was caught, and in the final hours, under went a Drum Head Court Martial on Singapore Docks, and then despatched.

 

Perceval had no choice but to ask for terms. According to my grandad, those first echelon of Japanese troops were relatively decent. These were crack troops. At first, the POWs were left to themselves in Changi; Army trucks and tents were moved into the area, and  they existed on British rations, until the spuds ran out. Half the troops were split for Sima. My Grandad left in October 42 on the Dainichi Maru, bound for Formosa (Taiwan).

 

Upon arrival in Taipai, he was met by American POWs. These were some of the survivors of Bataan. Like the British, captured in tropical dress. The Americans had built the POW camps on Formosa, and were now being shipped to Manchuria and Japan.

 

In Taiwan, the British (with a handful of Australians and Dutch POWs) were split into two groups. One group were sent to the Kinkaseki Copper Mines; this deserves to be as well known as the Burma Siam trainline. It was appalling.

 

My Grandad was "lucky" he was in the other group. They were then tasked to build the Japanese a "Victory Lake", then work the fields. He ended up a bus garage.

 

In the final months, the surviving POWs were moved inland, and made to build a new camp from scratch. My grandad didn't know it, but they were building a death camp; when the Allies landed on Taiwan, the POWs were to be killed efficiently and without bullets.

 

When the war ended, he was taken off the island in September 1945. He was too weak for the trip to Canada, and was taken to Manila for recuperation. He finally reached home by December 1945. The FEPOWs were ordered not to talk of their experiences, "in case you upset someone". That, and because the war was well over, was the reason that the FE POWs, besides Thailand, were talked about less.

On 8/15/2025 at 7:06 PM, CharlieH said:

The 76-year-old monarch highlighted the profound devastation caused by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, expressing hope that such tragedies never occur again.

Does he have any comments on the British fire bombings of Germany.   In July 194 the brits fire bombed  Hamburg killing 45,000 people. 

 

 

4 hours ago, MicroB said:

The British troops were defending British rule, not bringing freedom.

That was a point of contention between FDR and Churchill.   FDR was against colonial rule after the war ended. 

On 8/15/2025 at 7:06 PM, CharlieH said:

expressing hope that such tragedies never occur again.

 

Hope my butt. 

They start wars whenever it suits their agenda because they and their children don't need to fight in them. 

 

58 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

Does he have any comments on the British fire bombings of Germany.   In July 194 the brits fire bombed  Hamburg killing 45,000 people. 

 

 

 

Or even comments about the fire bombings of Tokyo?  80-100,000 killed in two nights. 

7 hours ago, save the frogs said:

 

Hope my butt. 

They start wars whenever it suits their agenda because they and their children don't need to fight in them. 

 

 

And who started the fighting, really? Genius.

7 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

 

Or even comments about the fire bombings of Tokyo?  80-100,000 killed in two nights. 

 

How many Chinese did Japan slay from 1937 to the end of WW2??

Like his grandmother, William will make an excellent Monarch.

21 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

That was a point of contention between FDR and Churchill.   FDR was against colonial rule after the war ended. 

 

 

What FDR wanted was irrelevant, as he was dead. US policy was all over the place. It enthusiastically supported Indian independance, was less effusive about Malaya and actively pushed against th British leaving Hong Kong. In Indo China, Truman was a hige supporter of France reasserting control. After Dien Bien Phu, they stepped to support the quasi-colonial adminstration in the South rather than allowing full self determination by Vietnam. The US did play hardball though with the Netherlands over Indonesia, threatening to cut off Marshall Aid. And thr US only granted independance to the Philippines when it felt confident the country would remain within the US sphere of influence. In Korea, the US talked about decolonising Korea from Japanese rule, but in reality, it carved up the country with the USSR, without much say from the Koreans. In Taiwan, Roosevelt back the idea of the island moving from the control of one colonial power, Japan, to abother, China. The US took control of many Japanese former colonies across the Pacific, used the sites for bomb testing, and only gave independance in the 80s and 90s.

 

So, the US was anti-Colonial if the Colonial powers were European.  Their concerns for Asia were little to do with championing the people of the Continent.

9 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Like his grandmother, William will make an excellent Monarch.

 

He's a decent person, but its a different time. His grandmother came to the throne after the sudden death of her father from cancer. We can speculate what cancer Charles has, but likely its the cancer you die  with, rather than from. Likely he will ascend the throne in his late 40s, but its a different world from that of Elizabeth. A lot more is known about him than the young Queen.

 

The reason Queen Elizabeth is remembered as an excellent Monarch is because of her steadiness, and her ability to embody the nation. Her son is rather different, but not in a bad way. He is much more opinionated, but that's reflective of the age; we are all now much more opinionated than Elizabeth's time. Its easy to forget how much cap doffing there was in the past.

 

As a result, the Queen was much more neutral with her governments, but that's more reflective of her generation. Charles won't get that much of a chance to interact with different governments. William will, and as a Millenial Monarch, he is bound to be much more opinionated. As a result, he will be naturally more devisive, as not everyone will agree.

 

His father holds strong opinions on the environment, that his sons share, naturally. William has involved himself in Homelessness, Mental Health, Childhood Development and Poverty, and Humanitarianism. He has recently expressed an opinion urging the end to the war in Gaza which was quite contentious, but typical for his generation. In American terms, he is a progressive, and as such, that is less likely to unify the nation. But we don't know what nation there will be when he becomes King. Its highly likely there won't be a United Kingdom. In which case, he will face entirely different challenges to his Grandmother, who came to the throne when the country had just gone through a communal, unifying event.

 

So whatever qualities made her an excellent monarch likely will not apply to William. If he becomes am excellent monarch, it will be due to different, not yet identified qualities. The Queen presided over the end of Empire. At the end of her reign, the Queen was less relevant to that former Empire compared to the start, but her personal qualities ensured a fraternal relationship. William's challenge, if he presides over a disintegrating UK, is whether the emerging nations maintain a fraternal relationship with each other, or will it be more like the Republic of Ireland following independance, where that relationship was riven with suspicion and at time hostility. William's role might well be guiding the monarchy to constitutional irrelevance, so it doesn't matter whether George is an excellent monarch or not.