There are always lots of confused reports following incidents like this, especially in the first 24-48hrs. Read any debrief report from a major incident and there are lots of examples.

I’m not saying you are right or wrong. You always give a good write up of what you believe, however, I will go back to an earlier point. Iraq. The western world dived in backed up with evidence. I still think there is something fishy about it but I’m not privy to whatever the evidence supposedly is

Regards

King James

yawn

we get it, you don't agree with anything the Conservative government do. That's right, GOVERNMENT, you know, the people that WON the election that the MAJORITY support.

If you don't like it, move Comrade Corbyn's favoured country.
[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43609296[/url

this tells you what kind of people you're associated with...

The most terrifying thing about some conservatives is their complete lack of any doubts or capacity for critical analysis.

Needless to say, the MAJORITY didn't support the Conservatives. Not even close to it.

so, the majority were just too lazy to express tneir opinion in an election?

utter rubbish, but that's what intelligent people have come to expect from socialism.

Regardless of turnout, are you trying to say the Conservatives got a majority of the votes in the election?

sorry, who is IN GOVERNMENT?

who waged illegal wars
who sold gold at a record low
who let down countless people by increasing the deficit

does anyone with a brain vote Labour, no.

it's simple

The Conservatives. Who got 42.4% of the vote. They are a perfectly legitimate government, but it's also true that nowhere near a majority voted for them.
I've ignored your party talking points as they're not worthy of discussion other than you might want to ask what the people you support wanted to do at the time each of those decisions was made.

When was the last time any government regardless of political persuasion actually got over 50% of the electoral vote?

It was actually the Conservatives in 1931 so since then every government elected has had a majority of the population not vote for it.

not quite true, a "majority" is when someone/party gets the highest number of votes, so every government has had a majority. A majority is not 50%, especially not in a system with idiots like the Lib Dems and Greens involved.

:1ti0f4a2

I think that you may need a dictionary
1.
the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total ( minority): the majority of the population.
2.
a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number.
3.
the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder ( plurality).
4.
the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic Party is the majority.
5.
the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one's majority.

They had the largest share of the vote but, not the majority of them

I didn't know you'd written your own dictionary, bless, glad you have time to do so.

Quote ="wrencat1873"I think that you may need a dictionary: ma·jor·i·ty [m uh- jawr-i-tee, - jor- NOUN [PLURAL MA·JOR·I·TIES. 1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total ( minority): the majority of the population. 2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number. 3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder ( plurality). 4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic Party is the majority. 5. the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one's majority. They had the largest share of the vote but, not the majority of them '" Oxford English https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority you know, the one we all use, not the American version that you copied and pasted (which I might point out is againat the AUP)

Quote ="wrencat1873"I think that you may need a dictionary: ma·jor·i·ty [m uh- jawr-i-tee, - jor- NOUN [PLURAL MA·JOR·I·TIES. 1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total ( minority): the majority of the population. 2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number. 3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder ( plurality). 4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic Party is the majority. 5. the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one's majority. They had the largest share of the vote but, not the majority of them '" Oxford English https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority you know, the one we all use, not the American version that you copied and pasted (which I might point out is againat the AUP)

Quote ="PCollinson1990"Oxford English https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority you know, the one we all use, not the American version that you copied and pasted (which I might point out is againat the AUP) '" As we are on the "Donald Trump" thread, I thought that you may prefer the American version. Regardless of the source, it's clear that, although the Tories won most seats and polled the largest amount of votes, they didn't actually receive the "majority" of the votes. However, they have made new friends (The DUP) so, everything is tickety boo.

Quote ="PCollinson1990"Oxford English https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/majority you know, the one we all use, not the American version that you copied and pasted (which I might point out is againat the AUP) '" As we are on the "Donald Trump" thread, I thought that you may prefer the American version. Regardless of the source, it's clear that, although the Tories won most seats and polled the largest amount of votes, they didn't actually receive the "majority" of the votes. However, they have made new friends (The DUP) so, everything is tickety boo.

there we go, spinning the facts to suit your own argument.

I never realised Tresaon Tony posted on here along with Bull541t Brown.

On the 12th March, Teresa May declared in parliament that the nerve agent came from Russia and she had evidence to back it up.

Oops

Yet you will still all believe what the BBC, sky and the daily mail tell you

Regards

King James

This, from an interview given by Boris Johnson two weeks ago:



Oh dear - the UK government appears to have 'accidentally' caused a major international diplomatic incident...

you really do make me laugh... you should be on stage...

Clearly, you have a full picture of ALL intelligence and evidence gathered relating to the incident?

Thought not.

Only if you desperately spin to suit your agenda or make headlines.

You do realise they obtained samples from around Salisbury and from the victims? What do you think the OPCW are testing?

Boris and Theresa lol. Not content with being a laughing stock of the political world, have now decided to turn to full on lies. You couldnt make this up lol

Regards

King James

They've probably taken advice from "The Donald".
Say anything you like and they just deny having said it when the starts flying around.
You'd still wager that Russia was behind the incident but, its just a little too bold to start recriminations without total certainty.

It has all gone very quiet in the west and Putin is chucking diplomats out like they're going out of fashion.

Good on Putin. Its about time someone stood up to the lies that come from the Tory party and Trump

Regards

King James

What makes you think they don't have total certainty? You honestly think such unprecedented and robust action would be taken by so 29 nations and NATO without certainty?

Are you, like that poor man's excuse for a troll, party to ALL evidence and intelligence relating to the attack?

Or are you simply railing pointlessly against a Tory government?

Nah it's all a false flag lies...Tories innit fam...divert from Brexit...saw it on Twitter innit...wake up sheeples...never Russia, trustworthy Putin bro...what you mean facts, some left wing bloke said innit...

Nah - because we've never acted on dodgy intelligence before have we?