Welcome To The UK You Magnificent B@stard.

I never thought that my political standing would be where it is now as twenty years ago I was voting for that tosser Tony Blair.

What brought this about for me was that I respect politicians who are out and out for what they believe in like Farage and Trump.

Now look at the dithery old Labour and Conservatives, they could have ruined themselves forever with this fiasco - they do not really know what they want at all and the voters are confused.

This **** needs taken out.

Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

*sigh*

Lets ban everyone who dares to disagree with somebody else's view as the person disagreeing is always obviously in the right.

munchymagic wrote:

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

*sigh*

Lets ban everyone who dares to disagree with somebody else's view as the person disagreeing is always obviously in the right.

Your the worst of the lot then Munchy.
Practise what you preach and all that.

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

I'm not sure it's the same thing. Begum is a terrorist and I think it's reasonable that some people are going to post that they wish a terrorist was dead for what they did. But Trump hasn't committed any acts of terror, he is a democratically elected leader. Suggesting that an elected leader needs taken out is wrong, it goes against what democracy is all about.

bluebry wrote:

munchymagic wrote:

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

*sigh*

Lets ban everyone who dares to disagree with somebody else's view as the person disagreeing is always obviously in the right.

Your the worst of the lot then Munchy.
Practise what you preach and all that.

You are totally wrong Bry.

A messageboard is a place for people to agree or disagree - please point out the post where I actually asked for someone to be banned?

You wont find it unless it was said in jest.

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

No you left leaning surrender monkey liberal appologists are more dangerous to the Uk than anything i can remember.
If it was up to the likes of you we'd probably have Prime Minister Khan by now and looking at the state of London that is something to be terrified about.

Don't let Trump in the country because I don't like him, don't let Tommy Robinson into the City because other political parties do not like him.

They will be demanding what we vote for next with only one box to cross.

munchymagic wrote:

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

*sigh*

Lets ban everyone who dares to disagree with somebody else's view as the person disagreeing is always obviously in the right.

Hilarious that you post that considering your behaviour on here.

munchymagic wrote: Don't let Trump in the country because I don't like him, don't let Tommy Robinson into the City because other political parties do not like him.

They will be demanding what we vote for next with only one box to cross.

You do seem to get some things right though, this being one of them. I didn't like the response to the milkshake incident with TR. We shouldn't be a society where it's ok to throw substances at people for their political beliefs, regardless of how unpopular they are.

What are these Lefty idiots forgetting? The man is here to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D Day landings and the brave men who went and the many that never returned. But the lefty London liberals want to fly there balloon, if it wasn't for the help of the Americans they wouldn't be able to, they would be goose-stepping around and all have blonde hair.

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote:

whytakemypostcode wrote: Didn't see a ban for Alan for saying the same thing about Begum, however unlike Shamima Begum, Trump is actually dangerous!

*sigh*

Lets ban everyone who dares to disagree with somebody else's view as the person disagreeing is always obviously in the right.

Hilarious that you post that considering your behaviour on here.

Explain?

Just because I refused to accept your email address that I did not want?

Get over it as your obsession to question nearly everything I post is a bit of a shan.

munchymagic wrote: Explain?

Just because I refused to accept your email address that I did not want?

No, it's because even though I have always been polite with you, you threw a tantrum when I disagreed with you and threatened to come to my workplace and hassle me when I was working. Even after I explained why that will not be happening (You seem a very aggressive man, I am not interested in meeting someone who cannot remain civil when I call them out on their bullshit plus the stuff I've said about the board would mean an instant sacking if they ever ID me), you kept on at it like a dog with a bone and made yourself look ridiculous. So I find it ironic that you now seem to have a problem with people overreacting to others disagreeing with them.

munchymagic wrote: Get over it as your obsession to question nearly everything I post is a bit of a shan.

Interesting. Earlier here you said that a message board is a place to agree and disagree. Sometimes I disagree with the stuff you post. Are you now saying that it's wrong for me to challenge something you say if I disagree with it, in contradiction to your earlier post? I thought you didn't like people not being allowed to say what they want because others don't like it, I guess not.

Donald Trump may have his critics and detractors, which is fair enough, he`s a politician, myself, I`d have him any day rather than the pair of feckwits that lead the Conservative and Labour parties.

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote: Explain?

Just because I refused to accept your email address that I did not want?

No, it's because even though I have always been polite with you, you threw a tantrum when I disagreed with you and threatened to come to my workplace and hassle me when I was working. Even after I explained why that will not be happening (You seem a very aggressive man, I am not interested in meeting someone who cannot remain civil when I call them out on their bullshit plus the stuff I've said about the board would mean an instant sacking if they ever ID me), you kept on at it like a dog with a bone and made yourself look ridiculous. So I find it ironic that you now seem to have a problem with people overreacting to others disagreeing with them.

munchymagic wrote: Get over it as your obsession to question nearly everything I post is a bit of a shan.

Interesting. Earlier here you said that a message board is a place to agree and disagree. Sometimes I disagree with the stuff you post. Are you now saying that it's wrong to challenge people when you disagree with them, contradicting your previous quote?

Did you not read what I wrote - I do not agree with banning people because of their views.

I was right about you being obsessed with my posts as well I see....

munchymagic wrote: I do not agree with banning people because of their views.

Nah, you just threaten to go and harass them at their place of work instead. Much more tolerant.

munchymagic wrote: I was right about you being obsessed with my posts as well I see....

You are the one with the obsession, I simply treat you like I do any other user on here. While I agree with some of what you say (you will notice I agreed with your post criticizing banning people for what they say) I do think some of the stuff you post is wrong and if I disagree with it I will challenge it. You claim that you want people to be free to disagree, so why are you reacting with such hostility towards me, accusing me of having an obsession simply because I dared to disagree with you? You say one thing but you behave in the opposite way. You seem like a very aggressive man who isn't used to people disagreeing with him and subsequently doesn't know how to react, other than bluster.

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote: I do not agree with banning people because of their views.

Nah, you just threaten to go and harass them at their place of work instead.

munchymagic wrote: I was right about you being obsessed with my posts as well I see....

You are the one with the obsession. You say that you want people to be able to say their opinion, but when I politely challenged you you said you were g oing to come to my workplace and hassle me when I was busy working. Do you not see the contradiction? You are the one with the obsession, you are obviously a very argumentative man who isn't used to people calling him out on his nonsense. Grow up and get over yourself.

I said I would answer the questions that you asked when I seen you - they were hardly nasty questions that you asked so why would I want to hassle you, I just offered to do so but I didn't want your email address because you seem like trouble - that was the reason I refused.

That is all I have to say on this.

munchymagic wrote: I said I would answer the questions that you asked when I seen you - they were hardly nasty questions that you asked so why would I want to hassle you

I didn't have a problem with that part as such. It was how you kept going on about it after I had explained to you why it wouldn't be happening.

munchymagic wrote: I just offered to do so but I didn't want your email address because you seem like trouble

If I could trust you to remain civil when I disagreed with you and challenged some of the stuff you say then I would have no problem meeting you. But your behaviour on here suggests you wouldn't manage that. I offered you email as an alternative but you still weren't happy.

Nothing better than making a brew a slice of cake and putting feet up and watching two people falling out on this messageboard ....this could be better than last night's match....

There's definitely more aggression

Not really lads, she is just a young lass and because I am aware of this I know what is acceptable to post

I'm not sure what you all want! Trump promised he would deliver his manifesto... He was democratically voted in.... He is delivering his manifesto. If only our lilly livered lying scum politicians would do the same.

There is a quite brilliant article in the Sunday Times today under the headline ‘The strange death of Labour Britain’Written by a guy who has penned a book called National Populism-The Revolt against Liberal Democracy.

The main thrust of the article surrounds Labour dicing with a death dive over courting Remainia.Basically, social democratic parties are in trouble because of a rapidly expanding university educated middle class.Labour would as a result be confronted with a nightmare trade off-on one side, try and win over the new middle classes but on the other, remain loyal to their traditional blue collar support.The result is that many of these blue collar guys don’t recognise their party anymore and these voters feel left behind and cheated by for example immigration.

Basically, the Labour Party is split in two and their Leader is struggling to keep a lid on the internal battle for its soul.

BlueBanana wrote: He was democratically voted in

That's why I think wishing him dead is completely different to saying the same about Begum. Whatever you think about him, Trump has won a democratic election and has a legitimacy to govern. It's an affront to that democratic process to suggest it be subverted via violence. Whereas Shamima Begum is a terrorist, she supported beheadings and executions. Whether you think she deserves to die will likely depend on your view towards the death penalty, but at the very least almost everybody agrees she should be locked up. I would say that wishing death on a terrorist is a valid opinion to have. Wishing death upon a democratically elected leader you don't like is not.

Laffy wrote: There is a quite brilliant article in the Sunday Times today under the headline ‘The strange death of Labour Britain’Written by a guy who has penned a book called National Populism-The Revolt against Liberal Democracy.

The main thrust of the article surrounds Labour dicing with a death dive over courting Remainia.Basically, social democratic parties are in trouble because of a rapidly expanding university educated middle class.Labour would as a result be confronted with a nightmare trade off-on one side, try and win over the new middle classes but on the other, remain loyal to their traditional blue collar support.The result is that many of these blue collar guys don’t recognise their party anymore and these voters feel left behind and cheated by for example immigration.

Basically, the Labour Party is split in two and their Leader is struggling to keep a lid on the internal battle for its soul.

The Torys are so United at the moment !!!!!!!!I just hope it’s the end of a disgusting selfish political party that only looks after the rich

Americans had a choice between Clinton and trump. There is no way he is as dangerous as that psychotic bitch. I still don't understand why he wants us out the eu. Britain has been americas lapdog since thatcher. The US will lose significant influence when the UK comes out

Let's all vote for the biggest headcases makes total sense.

whytakemypostcode wrote: This **** needs taken out.

For a few pints?

Here we go again-who mentioned the Tories?You did of course but you miss the point that it’s Farage and the Liberals who are hurting them-not the Tories.

The Tories don’t represent anyone at the moment but they clearly did at the last election because they unequivocally won it.

The rather sad thing for Labour is that the collapse of its vote will let Farage in.There was a 22pc swing to the Liberals from Labour in the EU election ,with the working class disenfranchised moving to Farage-result being that Labour has lost at both ends of the party.

This mirrors Corbyn’s pathetic leadership-a vehement opponent of the EU but his party scrambling around looking for votes.

This is the perfect storm and Farage is walking on water

CumbrianView wrote: What are these Lefty idiots forgetting? The man is here to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D Day landings and the brave men who went and the many that never returned. But the lefty London liberals want to fly there balloon, if it wasn't for the help of the Americans they wouldn't be able to, they would be goose-stepping around and all have blonde hair.

Leave.EU ✔ @LeaveEUOfficial

Plans by depraved idiots for a protest against President Trump at the 75th anniversary of D-Day in Portsmouth are "… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

02 Jun 2025 17:16

2362 Retweets 6531 favorites

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

Well it’s fair to say we should be grateful to the USA for the defeat of Nazism. Although had ‘a Trump’ been in charge the ‘America first’ ethos may have been a significant factor in them not entering the European theatre of war and we’d have had to totally rely on the Left wing Soviet Communists to completely win the war as opposed to ‘left wing’ communists loosing 20 million citizens to take on the majority of the Nazis forces.

Is this one of these daily express things where Labour comes 3rd, the tories 5th so let's look at Labours disaster. If Corbyn bites the bullet and says, Labour government, 2nd referendum, he has a good chance of being pm because he'll get the 48%. Harder for the tories, battling with farage for the outers.

Markovitch wrote: Is this one of these daily express things where Labour comes 3rd, the tories 5th so let's look at Labours disaster. If Corbyn bites the bullet and says, Labour government, 2nd referendum, he has a good chance of being pm because he'll get the 48%. Harder for the tories, battling with farage for the outers.

Corbyn is your problem Marko.

Him and Abbott come on?!?

The public had no support or respect for May but the alternative is Corbyn and Abbott- Tommy Robinson is a better choice as at least he can count.

munchymagic wrote:

Markovitch wrote: Is this one of these daily express things where Labour comes 3rd, the tories 5th so let's look at Labours disaster. If Corbyn bites the bullet and says, Labour government, 2nd referendum, he has a good chance of being pm because he'll get the 48%. Harder for the tories, battling with farage for the outers.

Corbyn is your problem Marko.

Him and Abbott come on?!?

The public had no support or respect for May but the alternative is Corbyn and Abbott- Tommy Robinson is a better choice as at least he can count.

Gregg Abbott would be a better choice. Could maybe even get Kav in as defence secretary.

Dancingbear wrote:

munchymagic wrote:

Markovitch wrote: Is this one of these daily express things where Labour comes 3rd, the tories 5th so let's look at Labours disaster. If Corbyn bites the bullet and says, Labour government, 2nd referendum, he has a good chance of being pm because he'll get the 48%. Harder for the tories, battling with farage for the outers.

Corbyn is your problem Marko.

Him and Abbott come on?!?

The public had no support or respect for May but the alternative is Corbyn and Abbott- Tommy Robinson is a better choice as at least he can count.

Gregg Abbott would be a better choice. Could maybe even get Kav in as defence secretary.

Just don't let Keith Curle in there in any capacity or he will bankrupt the Government and we will have to rely on Holdsworth to bail us out and save us all.

Funnily enough - Curle once did save us from relegation.

The only thing Holdsworth saves are bus tickets from outside the bus station that have vouchers on the back to redeem at McDonalds.

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote: I said I would answer the questions that you asked when I seen you - they were hardly nasty questions that you asked so why would I want to hassle you

I didn't have a problem with that part as such. It was how you kept going on about it after I had explained to you why it wouldn't be happening.

munchymagic wrote: I just offered to do so but I didn't want your email address because you seem like trouble

If I could trust you to remain civil when I disagreed with you and challenged some of the stuff you say then I would have no problem meeting you. But your behaviour on here suggests you wouldn't manage that. I offered you email as an alternative but you still weren't happy.

You are totally wrong about me.

I honestly don't want to meet you or give you my email address.

You are a very weird to push either point.

I wish you all the best in the future as you may be a nice person.

Take care

Munch

munchymagic wrote: Funnily enough - Curle once did save us from relegation.

The only thing Holdsworth saves are bus tickets from outside the bus station that have vouchers on the back to redeem at McDonalds.

We seem to have found something that we agree on here. When you talk about players contracts and wages you can usually point to things that show how valuable they are to the club. For example we can say the club has spent money on this player but in return we've got a lot of goals from them or they have kept a lot of clean sheets. You can quantify their value to the club.

What value does Holdsworth bring to the club? Are we any better off with him being here? Can the club name any specific examples where he has actually earned his salary? I think those are questions they won't want to answer.

Ireland's govt 'told to ignore Boris Johnson' by Foreign Office
Whitehall officials are willing to tell foreign governments "not to listen" to the Foreign Secretary, Sky News has learnt.


Extraordinarily, officials in Whitehall were very open with their counterparts in the Irish capital to "ignore the public utterances" of Britain's chief diplomat.

news.sky.com/story/irelands-govt-told-to...eign-office-11150411



Boris, the great negotiator

Boris is an enthusiastic optimist. That does mean he says things which may be difficult or even impossible for other people to deliver. As Mayor of London he got things done even though some were crazy like the replacement Routemasters and the Emirates cable car. The contrast with Khan who just hides away is remarkable.

I remember in Boris's first few weeks as Foreign Secretary, he got awfully excited about the coup in Turkey to replace Erdogan. He almost went so far as to encourage the Turks to join in the revolution until he realised the coup had failed, Erdogan wasn't fleeing the country and the reprisals were about to start.

The grim tenure of Theresa May has inflicted misery on the country and almost destroyed the Conservatives. Most Tories and many working class former Labour voters would now welcome Boris's gung-ho optimism as a blessed relief. And that is why the Left want to stop Boris becoming the next Tory leader.

Sounds like a lot of people want the lunatics to take over the asylum lol.
As far as Labour go they desperately need to get rid of JC and his side kick if they want to ever get in.

Still remember Boris calling Erdogan a goat [censored] [censored]. [censored] business was 2 (?) weeks ago. And he screwed his best friends wife. A true gentleman
He could only ever be considered leadership material when put next to a man who fiddles his expenses and doesn't go to work. Westminster is worse than the Ukrainian parliament. But we can't vote for Corbyn, a man who has committed the ultimate sin in English politics, he is honest. How could Boris ever deal with an honest man?! He wouldn't know where to start

I was very anti-Trump at the start, however, I am changing my mind. He is trying to deliver on his ' America First ' and ' We'll build a wall ' promises, but being held back by anything the opposition can think up. Other than upset the Muslim community at the start, I can't see he has done allot wrong.

But, the cost of Trump's personality is respect for your adversaries, the UK is suffering also as some politicians give of a persona of hate.

The big crunch will come when the Yanks insist the NHS comes up for grabs during a post Brexit trade deal.

And if the NHS question is asked i hope they tell him where to go

A simple foxtrot oscar will suffice .

If folk want private healthcare go pay bupa

Stay in Europe or leave, the NHS will still be vulnerable to any trade deal negotiated by the UK on its own or if a trade deal was done between Europe and The USA.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)

waronwant.org/what-ttip

www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/wha...are-you-9779688.html

Laffy wrote: Here we go again-who mentioned the Tories?You did of course but you miss the point that it’s Farage and the Liberals who are hurting them-not the Tories.

The Tories don’t represent anyone at the moment but they clearly did at the last election because they unequivocally won it.

The rather sad thing for Labour is that the collapse of its vote will let Farage in.There was a 22pc swing to the Liberals from Labour in the EU election ,with the working class disenfranchised moving to Farage-result being that Labour has lost at both ends of the party.

This mirrors Corbyn’s pathetic leadership-a vehement opponent of the EU but his party scrambling around looking for votes.

This is the perfect storm and Farage is walking on water

A bit of the pan calling the kettle black This post was about Trump but you had to have a go at The Labour Party Then you don’t like it when people have a go at the greedy horrible Conservative party that you idealise!!!!!

All well and good, it's a free Country (allegedly). However if you want to be a public figure, then you should take the rough with the smooth. You may not like Trump (or the Saudi's, or Indians, or Jews) However, this lack of respect is exactly what is wrong with the UK at the moment.
So, Corbyn wins the next GE and wants to talk to the Yanks about trade, security and getting rid of nukes, I think we know what their answer will be..............

CCU wrote: Just said on the News that Corbyn, Cable and Bercow won’t be attending the State dinner.

I’d call that a result personally!

Just goes to show how petty the Labour party have become.

Imagine Corbyn in charge, he would probably only meet The Dalai Lama to do a bit of meditating.