| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
In that case, can you point me to the long-term safety data that backs up your statement? Thanks in advance.Originally Posted by delmbox
In that case, I would expect to see them on the BBC and in newsprint, and also on social media feeds, but in reality they have to resort to obscure websites if they want to make their opinions known, and then muppets like you attack these websites
I don’t need to, we’re talking current scorecards…your words not mine
You can’t find them on social media feeds?In that case, I would expect to see them on the BBC and in newsprint, and also on social media feeds, but in reality they have to resort to obscure websites if they want to make their opinions known, and then muppets like you attack these websites
You said they are safe. How many placebo's were given? What are the side-effects after 3-years, 5-years and 8-years, etc.
How can they be on social media feeds when they have been banned by social media
Everybody who’s argued the PCR test had a high false positive rate and said they should only isolate the vulnerable and elderly have been banned from social media?How can they be on social media feeds when they have been banned by social media
If you say you’re English these days they throw you in jail
Hello Mr Straw Man.
Real libertarians might have disagreed with the sort of minor anti royal protests we've seen in the last week or so, but they would have accepted the right of the people concerned to make them. However, there's a new right wing, snowflake libertarian about these days who have an attitude of I'm free to say and do what I like and bugger the consequences. They're also intolerant of any dissenting voices to their opinions - the likes of the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Sun are full of these bullies who twenty five years ago would have been piling into the Royal family for their reaction to Princess Diana's death.
There are some bullies on the left working for papers like the Guardian and Mirror as well and I'm not fully convinced that it is totally a fear of the consequences of them reporting the events of the past week in a different way which has led to the BBC's grovelling attitude towards the Royals. However. I do think it is a reasonable argument that Polly Toynbee makes and so I do have a bit more sympathy towards the Corporation about this than I did this time yesterday.
I thought it was a sincere piece at first.
That supreme royal crawler Nicholas Witchell has likely been in huge demand to appear on US TV networks to share sycophantic anecdotes with his visage suitably woebegone.
Something akin to: "She was wonderful in every possible way. When she broke wind in my presence, which was a regular occurrence, I was always reminded of the Viennese Philharmonic Orchestra in all its pomp."
I think it's just the general divisiveness with which she frequently writes, and the smug kind of air she always accuses others of perpetuating a culture war, as if the stuff she pumps out isn't so. She speaks of a 'right wing mob'but thats almost entirely in her imagination. It isn't so. I've seen loads of voices 'on the right' (and left too) express the importance of the right to protest. I've also seen people across the spectrum criticise peoples decision to protest at a funeral or memorial service, which is also a fair point.
There are grey areas here though; Firstly, someone's right to protest vs causing offence. The guardian is very selective on that. Would they support someone raising grooming gang issues at some random mosque in Rotherham? Did they support booing of taking the knee? These are totally crass and insensitive things to do, but lie within peoples right to protest.
FWIW, I think most are agreed that irrespective of your opinion on the monarchy agree that booing minutes silence is essentially just very bad behaviour, and thats not inconsistent with absolutely defending someone's right to do it.
It's just her general tone. Anyone who has a different opinion is 'fuming' or a 'mob', 'heresy hunters'.
I think probably the worst example of these kind of witchhunts I've seen is when people ganged up on companies to stop them advertising on GB news before the channel even launched. They were strangely silent on that one..
63.2% of the Worlds population watched the Queens funeral service today. Estimated to be 5.1bn
Sources BBC
.Nicholas whitchel counted them himself, I believe it.
Let’s not be silly now.
Utter bollocks!
99.9% of this mb watched the historic event.
Thanks for your hard work contacting all members of this MB and collating the results.
Great effort.
What was the final headcount for the MB?
I haven’t watched TV for 5 weeks and have not seen (or heard) any of the royal death and subsequent soap opera coverage. So if 1000 members of the board (that many excluding bots?) I must be the 0.1%.
Somehow I think there may be more of us.
Don't think many have gone without TV for 5 weeks
It’s easy - avoid websites like the BBC or any newspapers, and if you’re watching tv just watch Netflix etcDon't think many have gone without TV for 5 weeks
Just got through two series of better call saul since yesterday morning. No interest at all in seeing a posh old English women getting planted. Netflix must be loving this shit.
Although I do genuinely respect and understand the position of being a republican (I am in a theoretical if not practical sense one my self). I also respect someone may personally dislike the queen herself, although that is I think a far less common position and I am not sure it is yours. I also totally understand, and agree with, people thinking a lot of the coverage is a bit much.
However, I am not sure I understand the stance that someone who is undoubtedly as interested in politics and global affairs as you seem to be, in wanting to ignore it all?
There is the history, her history, our countries history, what she represents, linking the Britain of the war to the Britain of today.
There's the politics of what happens to the commonwealth countries, what happens to national bonds within the UK, how do our party leaders react? Does everyone coming together in the UK help ease EU or Irish border tensions? Has the period of non politics impacted the new PM's first weeks positively or not? Will it increase support for the monarchy or does her passing drive support for a republic?
Does the UK's standing in the world increase? Does it matter? These king of events can change opinions and politics, sometimes subtly, sometimes significantly.
There's just so much to absorb with it. Even if you wish it wasn't so, the fact is that it is news, and don't understand ignoring it all for that reason alone.
We have learnt this past week
- The Far left do not represent the people of The United Kingdom.
- The united Kingdom put on the best pageantry.
- At an estimated 4.1 billion watched this historic occasion.
- Scotland courtesy of today's event will reject independence.
- Mohammed Bin Salman couldn't get past the bouncers at the abbey
- CCMB is just an echo chamber of a vocal minority.
- Cardiff City will appoint another lame duck for a manager.
- The posh Democratic enclave of Martha's Vineyard held their noses for a day and then got rid pronto.
- Joe Biden was well down the pecking order for seat allocation.
- By decree of Joe Biden the pandemic is over.
- Liz Truss is capable of forgetting the things she said about the Monarchy when a younger liberal.
- Boris Johnson still doesn't possess a comb.
- Ukraine is mounting a decent counter offensive
- QEII.jpg
A.T.B
Clandestine
A large proportion of people in this country are brain dead if the death of someone they didn't even meet , never mind know sends them into crying fits
Absolute feck wits
Speak for yourself
And all the servicemen etc etc
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote