Another excellent prediction

[glosterred]

Is this the navy of the European Countries whose Union, according to you, we are are about to leave who will stop these boats? Or you and your private navy?

There isn't a navy of the European countries. I don't have a private army.

What are you blathering on about?

There is a European Union mission monitoring pirate activities in the Indian Ocean off the Horn of Africa, in essence a European Navy

[IC1967]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

[Glyn_Wigley]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

[wilts rover]

I would presume this plane would have been shot down by the armed forces of the country whose unarmed citizens it was machine gunning - which is not only an act of war but a war crime.

[Filo]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

[wilts rover]

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

How on earth do you come up with that? Your reasoning process is seriously flawed. Look. It's very simple. Until we are out of the EU we have to play by the rules. If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis and let those countries where they land deal with the problem.

Until that day we need to do our bit by sinking a few boats. That's if the EU ever comes around to my way of thinking.

No we don't. We are fully entitled to take whatever action we regard as being in our own national interest, as in the Falklands. Therefore by pure deduction, if you say you want us to persuade the EU to intervene, you want us to be in the EU! And you clearly don't know 'the rules'.
Get it. Got it. Good!

And how do you work out that

If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis

are UKIP planning on stopping all ferry, rail and air services with Europe then?

[IC1967]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

What a silly statement. Obviously you get permission for the leaflet drop first. 

Sorted.

[hoolahoop]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

What a silly statement. Obviously you get permission for the leaflet drop first. 

Sorted.

You',re a right little Houdini aren't you Mick ? As soon as someone pisses on your argument(s) you deem them silly, daft, not up to your intellectual standard etc.
Just hold your hands up occasionally when your arguments no longer hold any water.
No-one will think any less of you than they do already! If you come on here to debate ...then do just that and be prepared to lose as well as win arguments.
You have become a bore...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hoola mate. You've REALLY got to stop being so liberal. You're working on the premise that the person you are speaking to is amenable to rational discussion.

He's not. He's barking mad. Here's the proof.

If he genuinely believes what he writes, then he is barking mad.

If he's been deliberately WUM-ing for 4 years, through (at least) 3 different personas and he genuinely thinks it is side-splittingly funny, he is barking mad.

Conclusion: he is barking mad.

You're not going to appeal to a sensible better nature. You can either get your jollies by kicking the cat, or you can ignore him. Just don't try to appeal to logical discussion with him.

[BobG]

I did suggest once we send him to Coventry. Maybe the time has come to revisit that?

Bob

[Filo]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

[Glyn_Wigley]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

What a silly statement. Obviously you get permission for the leaflet drop first. 

Sorted.

PMSL. And you expect anyone to take you and your masterplan seriously? 

[IC1967]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

I'm assuming 'cartridge world' is cheap ink so it would be got from there. I would want to minimise costs as we've already had to borrow money to pay for our ongoing commitments to this crisis.

I'd just like to say thank you Filo for coming onboard with this plan but you've shot the gun a bit. We still need EU approval. Let's hope we get it soon so your efforts at designing the leaflets won't go to waste. 

[Glyn_Wigley]

I would presume this plane would have been shot down by the armed forces of the country whose unarmed citizens it was machine gunning - which is not only an act of war but a war crime.

Also what Mick is conveniently forgetting is that what he is proposing is that the UK unilaterally sink boats (registered in other countries) that have not committed any crime, containing people (who are citizens of other countries) that have not committed any crime, in International Waters. And he thinks we would be able to get away with mass murder of innocent people because every other country on Earth will just look the other way. What a prat.

[IC1967]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

What a silly statement. Obviously you get permission for the leaflet drop first. 

Sorted.

PMSL. And you expect anyone to take you and your masterplan seriously? 

PMSL. Look. I've got to be honest. I've been playing around with you a bit on the 'shot down plane' issue. Hopefully once I've cleared up this bit of the plan you'll take it more seriously.

We don't used manned planes you fool. Haven't you heard of drones? Obviously not.

Watch the video below to see how it could be done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98BIu9dpwHU

Now either get onboard with the plan (like Filo) or come up with your own workable plan.

Get on with it man.

[IC1967]

I did suggest once we send him to Coventry. Maybe the time has come to revisit that?

Bob

Look daft Bob. You're the one that suggested this before with hardly any support. You're the one pushing this plan but you're one of the prolific posters that responds to nearly every one of my posts even though you don't read them!

You couldn't make it up.

Send me to Coventry daft Bob. If others want to engage in intelligent debate that is far too much for your intellect let them get on with it.

Just because you are out of your depth doesn't mean others should suffer.

May I refer you to the 'Should I Stay Or Should I Go Thread'. There was overwhelming support for me to stay. I even got Yougov to do an internal poll for me which showed that there were many readers of the forum that aren't registered to post that wanted me to stay. 91% to 9%.

At least you've now stopped with all the homo erotic nonsense. Thank goodness people are far more tolerant these days of that kind of thing. I'd just ask you not to keep shoving it under the noses of those of us that are straight.

IC1967

[IC1967]

What a lot of silly questions.

No they aren't, they're extremely pertinent. You're only calling them silly because you haven't got any answers for them and you want to maintain your fantasyland 100% 'record'.

Any other time, one of our planes being shot down would be reason enough to start a war. Yet you maintain that wanting to know what you would do in the same circumstance is somehow deemed by you to be 'silly'. Sorry, but your attempt to dismiss an awkward but extremely important question by this pathetic tactic has unequivocally shown you up for what you are.

No it wouldn't. There has to be a sense of proportionality. If someone shot down one of our planes then there are many other options open to us other than starting a full scale war.

As well as silly questions you are also now making silly statements.

Now where's your plan? If you don't like mine then the least you can do is come up with a workable alternative.

100% record still intact.

Get on with it man.

Which option would you choose if our plane was shot down then? That was the original question, which you have still run scared from answering.

100%? Pfffft.

You need to be more specific. It all depends who shot it down and under what circumstances. There's no one general answer that will cover all eventualities which is why your question was deemed silly in the first pace.

100% record still intact.

OK then. It is shot down by the armed forces of the country whose air space our plane is in to deliver your leaflets. They say they shot it down because the plane was not authorised to be in their air space.

There you go.

What a silly statement. Obviously you get permission for the leaflet drop first. 

Sorted.

You',re a right little Houdini aren't you Mick ? As soon as someone pisses on your argument(s) you deem them silly, daft, not up to your intellectual standard etc.
Just hold your hands up occasionally when your arguments no longer hold any water.
No-one will think any less of you than they do already! If you come on here to debate ...then do just that and be prepared to lose as well as win arguments.
You have become a bore...

Look. I was having a laugh with the plane thing (see my previous post). Of course I knew how this part of the plan was going to work.

Anyway back to you. Where is the abject apology for saying that UKIP voters were made up of 2 million ex LibDems. Just admit you got that one wildly wrong with no evidence and we'll say no more about it. I always issue an abject apology when I'm in the wrong. Just ask Jucyberry.

Get on with it man. You know you should.

[Filo]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

I'm assuming 'cartridge world' is cheap ink so it would be got from there. I would want to minimise costs as we've already had to borrow money to pay for our ongoing commitments to this crisis.

I'd just like to say thank you Filo for coming onboard with this plan but you've shot the gun a bit. We still need EU approval. Let's hope we get it soon so your efforts at designing the leaflets won't go to waste. 

I just thought I'd ask a silly question thats all......





.... And you andwered it lol!

[IC1967]

Hoola mate. You've REALLY got to stop being so liberal. You're working on the premise that the person you are speaking to is amenable to rational discussion.

He's not. He's barking mad. Here's the proof.

If he genuinely believes what he writes, then he is barking mad.

If he's been deliberately WUM-ing for 4 years, through (at least) 3 different personas and he genuinely thinks it is side-splittingly funny, he is barking mad.

Conclusion: he is barking mad.

You're not going to appeal to a sensible better nature. You can either get your jollies by kicking the cat, or you can ignore him. Just don't try to appeal to logical discussion with him.

You're just sore that I've battered you in every debate I've ever had with you. You're particularly annoyed that I've turned this from a hardcore left wing den of iniquity into a moderate right wing forum.

Unlike daft Bob you know when you are beaten. Please send him a PM asking him to stop responding to my posts even though he hasn't read them. I thought you were his mate. With friends like you who needs enemies.

[IC1967]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

I'm assuming 'cartridge world' is cheap ink so it would be got from there. I would want to minimise costs as we've already had to borrow money to pay for our ongoing commitments to this crisis.

I'd just like to say thank you Filo for coming onboard with this plan but you've shot the gun a bit. We still need EU approval. Let's hope we get it soon so your efforts at designing the leaflets won't go to waste. 

I just thought I'd ask a silly question thats all......





.... And you andwered it lol!

100% record still intact. I do even answer some silly questions. At least there are one or two of us in this debate with a senses of humour. 

[IC1967]

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

How on earth do you come up with that? Your reasoning process is seriously flawed. Look. It's very simple. Until we are out of the EU we have to play by the rules. If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis and let those countries where they land deal with the problem.

Until that day we need to do our bit by sinking a few boats. That's if the EU ever comes around to my way of thinking.

No we don't. We are fully entitled to take whatever action we regard as being in our own national interest, as in the Falklands. Therefore by pure deduction, if you say you want us to persuade the EU to intervene, you want us to be in the EU! And you clearly don't know 'the rules'.
Get it. Got it. Good!

And how do you work out that

If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis

are UKIP planning on stopping all ferry, rail and air services with Europe then?

Silly question but I'll answer it. No.

[Glyn_Wigley]

I would presume this plane would have been shot down by the armed forces of the country whose unarmed citizens it was machine gunning - which is not only an act of war but a war crime.

Also what Mick is conveniently forgetting is that what he is proposing is that the UK unilaterally sink boats (registered in other countries) that have not committed any crime, containing people (who are citizens of other countries) that have not committed any crime, in International Waters. And he thinks we would be able to get away with mass murder of innocent people because every other country on Earth will just look the other way. What a prat.

I'll just repeat myself.

[IC1967]

I would presume this plane would have been shot down by the armed forces of the country whose unarmed citizens it was machine gunning - which is not only an act of war but a war crime.

Also what Mick is conveniently forgetting is that what he is proposing is that the UK unilaterally sink boats (registered in other countries) that have not committed any crime, containing people (who are citizens of other countries) that have not committed any crime, in International Waters. And he thinks we would be able to get away with mass murder of innocent people because every other country on Earth will just look the other way. What a prat.

I'll just repeat myself.

Excuse me. Where have I proposed unilateral action? All I've done is come up with the broad outline of a plan that would work. Surely if we can get authorisation from the UN to invade Iraq and kill hundreds of thousands of people and totally destabalise the Middle East then it should be quite easy to get permission to sink a few boats.

Sorted.

[Glyn_Wigley]

I would presume this plane would have been shot down by the armed forces of the country whose unarmed citizens it was machine gunning - which is not only an act of war but a war crime.

Also what Mick is conveniently forgetting is that what he is proposing is that the UK unilaterally sink boats (registered in other countries) that have not committed any crime, containing people (who are citizens of other countries) that have not committed any crime, in International Waters. And he thinks we would be able to get away with mass murder of innocent people because every other country on Earth will just look the other way. What a prat.

I'll just repeat myself.

Excuse me. Where have I proposed unilateral action? All I've done is come up with the broad outline of a plan that would work. Surely if we can get authorisation from the UN to invade Iraq and kill hundreds of thousands of people and totally destabalise the Middle East then it should be quite easy to get permission to sink a few boats.

Sorted.

Seeing as your broad outline tramples all over every Human Rights legislation everywhere you wouldn't get 'authorisation' from anybody - and especially not the UN -  for your cockeyed halfwitticism.

[wilts rover]

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

How on earth do you come up with that? Your reasoning process is seriously flawed. Look. It's very simple. Until we are out of the EU we have to play by the rules. If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis and let those countries where they land deal with the problem.

Until that day we need to do our bit by sinking a few boats. That's if the EU ever comes around to my way of thinking.

No we don't. We are fully entitled to take whatever action we regard as being in our own national interest, as in the Falklands. Therefore by pure deduction, if you say you want us to persuade the EU to intervene, you want us to be in the EU! And you clearly don't know 'the rules'.
Get it. Got it. Good!

And how do you work out that

If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis

are UKIP planning on stopping all ferry, rail and air services with Europe then?

Silly question but I'll answer it. No.

Then why would us leaving the EU be of relevance to the African migrant crisis - as highlighted in your quote above?

[wilts rover]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

I'm assuming 'cartridge world' is cheap ink so it would be got from there. I would want to minimise costs as we've already had to borrow money to pay for our ongoing commitments to this crisis.

I'd just like to say thank you Filo for coming onboard with this plan but you've shot the gun a bit. We still need EU approval. Let's hope we get it soon so your efforts at designing the leaflets won't go to waste. 

I just thought I'd ask a silly question thats all......





.... And you andwered it lol!

100% record still intact. I do even answer some silly questions. At least there are one or two of us in this debate with a senses of humour. 

Mmmm, hilarious topic isn't it?

[IC1967]

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

You have neglected to tell us where the ships who are going to sink the migrant boats are going to come from. A pretty essential part of you plan I would have thought?

There isn't a navy of the European Countries.....but the European Countries in the area of the Mediterrean where the migrant boats are arriving all have navies. Apologies if that was too difficult for you to understand, I forgot I had to keep things very simple for you.

You're the one that said there was a navy of the European countries. I'm glad you are now backtracking on this ridiculous statement.

Look. It's very simple. While we are part of the EU then agreement needs to be reached in Brussels before my excellent plan can be implemented. The boats could then be sunk by each country's navies so the cost could be shared around.

Sorted. 

So you want us to be part of the EU then?

How on earth do you come up with that? Your reasoning process is seriously flawed. Look. It's very simple. Until we are out of the EU we have to play by the rules. If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis and let those countries where they land deal with the problem.

Until that day we need to do our bit by sinking a few boats. That's if the EU ever comes around to my way of thinking.

No we don't. We are fully entitled to take whatever action we regard as being in our own national interest, as in the Falklands. Therefore by pure deduction, if you say you want us to persuade the EU to intervene, you want us to be in the EU! And you clearly don't know 'the rules'.
Get it. Got it. Good!

And how do you work out that

If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis

are UKIP planning on stopping all ferry, rail and air services with Europe then?

Silly question but I'll answer it. No.

Then why would us leaving the EU be of relevance to the African migrant crisis - as highlighted in your quote above?

I think I've answered more than enough of your silly questions. I'm not answering any more.

Now I'd be grateful if you could answer just one (yes just one) of my questions. What is your workable solution to the problem? All your leftie mates can help you out as you need all the help you can get.

[IC1967]

Should we purchase the printer cartridges for these leaflets from cartridge world or should we stick with OEM cartridges?

About the ink, is it OEM or cartridge world?

The print run is ready and waiting :-)

I'm assuming 'cartridge world' is cheap ink so it would be got from there. I would want to minimise costs as we've already had to borrow money to pay for our ongoing commitments to this crisis.

I'd just like to say thank you Filo for coming onboard with this plan but you've shot the gun a bit. We still need EU approval. Let's hope we get it soon so your efforts at designing the leaflets won't go to waste. 

I just thought I'd ask a silly question thats all......





.... And you andwered it lol!

100% record still intact. I do even answer some silly questions. At least there are one or two of us in this debate with a senses of humour. 

Mmmm, hilarious topic isn't it?

I'm glad you think so. It's about time you lightened up a bit. 

[wilts rover]

I think I've answered more than enough of your silly questions. I'm not answering any more.

Now I'd be grateful if you could answer just one (yes just one) of my questions. What is your workable solution to the problem? All your leftie mates can help you out as you need all the help you can get.

I know you wont, because you can't. Once again when asked to justify fatuous comments you are unable to reply and wish to change the subject. Because once again I have used my superior intellect to show how contradictory you are - and how much of what you say is false and untrue. Go on someone help him out. This is what he wrote:

How on earth do you come up with that? Your reasoning process is seriously flawed. Look. It's very simple. Until we are out of the EU we have to play by the rules. If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis and let those countries where they land deal with the problem.

and I have asked him to explain this bit:

If we were out we'd be able to forget about the migrant crisis

or - how would us leaving the EU mean we could forget about illegal immigration of people from Africa? (the answer isn't gunboats off Gibraltar by the way)

I gave you the answer to that question in the other thread you started- go and read it. I don't require anyone else to help, my answer is the same as that given by Captain Gerry Northwood, the former Commander of the UK Counter-Piracy Task Group and Head of Communications for Operation Atalanta, who may or may not be a leftie but will certainly know a lot more about stopping the migrant boats than you.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32428500

[IC1967]

Here's what Gerry said:

But Gerry Northwood, Atalanta's former head of operations, says destroying boats would have "limited value"

Boats are "cheap and plentiful" and easily replaced, he told the BBC

Is that it? Is that your solution? I'm on about sinking boats with people on them to ram the message home in the leaflets. Gerry is on about sinking boats before people are on them. Bit of a difference there if you don't mind me saying. I'm prepared to kill a few hundred people. Gerry is not.

It may seem a bit harsh to a leftie but my solution would result in far fewer deaths than yours would.

Where is your compassion? Why do you want hundreds of thousands to keep on dieing and for their money to keep on funding ISIS and the people smugglers?

You may want to be portrayed as a nice person at all costs but sometimes you have to be realistic.

It is a fact that long term my solution would result in far less deaths than yours.

You really make my piss boil that you would place being seen as a nice person on this forum over the huge loss of life that your approach would have over mine.

Get a f**king grip and come into the real world ffs.

I've got news for you. It is me that is the nice person because I'm prepared to countenance the tough decisions no matter what lefties think of me.

All you're bothered about is what will all your leftie mates think of you no matter how many innocent lives are lost. You couldn't give a f**k how many die.

Well I care. I want to minimise loss of life. My solution works. Yours is pie in the sky.

Get over it and come into the real world ffs.