Editor's Blog1 min ago
Not very proud now then?
72 Answers
http://www.dailymail....foreign-aid-Army.html
/// voters should take the same pride in it as they do in the Armed Forces and the Queen, a senior minister said yesterday. ///
Well considering how much pride some ABers on here have in the Armed Forces or the Queen, they also won't be showing very much proud in our lavish spending on foreign aid then.
/// voters should take the same pride in it as they do in the Armed Forces and the Queen, a senior minister said yesterday. ///
Well considering how much pride some ABers on here have in the Armed Forces or the Queen, they also won't be showing very much proud in our lavish spending on foreign aid then.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
andy....just for the record I thought that the Ed in the new AB era prohibited the naming of "troublemakers" or indeed criticizing in a perceived malicious way.
You are asking AOG to do just that.
I must say that i am confused as to what is and what is not permissible, but perhaps you can elucidate on the point of naming ABers.
You are asking AOG to do just that.
I must say that i am confused as to what is and what is not permissible, but perhaps you can elucidate on the point of naming ABers.
My point it sht AOG includes digs at people whom he does not like, but does not have the courage to face them directly - indeed, as i have already confirmed, he has taken to ignoring my posts completely.
For someone who professes to enjoy a debate, he seems selective in the choice of people with whom he will converse - jackthehat and I are obviously not included.
It just seems immature behaviour from one who spends such a vast amount of time squabbling with other AB'ers
For someone who professes to enjoy a debate, he seems selective in the choice of people with whom he will converse - jackthehat and I are obviously not included.
It just seems immature behaviour from one who spends such a vast amount of time squabbling with other AB'ers
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
sqad - apologies, I misunderstood the question you were directing to me -
I would not wish for anyone to transgress any rules of the AB - but i do feel that if AOG is going to start labelling individuals as 'troublemakers', then those individuals dserve a right of reply, which they can only access if they are advised whom AOg thinks are 'troublemakers'.
To date, SOG has not answered any of my posts directed towards him, on any of the threads on which he is posting.
For someone who not only confirms at regular intervals that he enjoys debate, and who is often fond of oblique references to imagined slights, then I regard such behaviour as childish at best, and ignorant at worst.
I would not wish for anyone to transgress any rules of the AB - but i do feel that if AOG is going to start labelling individuals as 'troublemakers', then those individuals dserve a right of reply, which they can only access if they are advised whom AOg thinks are 'troublemakers'.
To date, SOG has not answered any of my posts directed towards him, on any of the threads on which he is posting.
For someone who not only confirms at regular intervals that he enjoys debate, and who is often fond of oblique references to imagined slights, then I regard such behaviour as childish at best, and ignorant at worst.
