I'll gladly settle for a tie.  

I'd wear it around my waist to keep my trousers up  

HovisPresley wrote on 08/30/16 at 15:38:08:

... I'd wear it around my waist to keep my trousers up ...

 AND:    HovisPresley wrote on 08/30/16 at 15:38:08:

I wish Youtube was about in Marx and Engels' day...

  AND:    HovisPresley wrote on 08/30/16 at 15:38:08:

... f you don't talk in riddles, you might get an answer....

 

Not so long ago, people had a, Wood Burning, Kitchen Stove.
If you want to heat something, you sent it on the stove, on the, ‘removable’ plates in the surface of the stove.
If you wanted to heat something FAST, their were, ‘pots’ and ‘Kettles’, that could be had,
which had a ‘indented’ bottom.
Which then the, ’removable’, flat, wood burning stove, ‘plates’ were removed.
One could place that, pot or kettle, in the, ‘hole’, which fit perfectly.
And then the flame, would be directly, on  the pot/kettle bottom.
Thus the phrase: “… The Kettle calling the Pot Black…”

 I Don’t  FEED,   Trolls !
Even when they ask for the ‘results’, of a Meeting,
where a meeting is Very Well Known,
but, ‘what is said”,    is  TOP  Secret.
  (Don’t think they are talking about how high the grass is in Hyde’s Park  LOLOL)

But the recent responses.
I will resort to a very, ‘well worn phrase”
 “Is that, a Pot, calling the Kettle Black” ?

(Could Not resist)   LLOLOLOOL

OBTW, Bought a,  '(GASP)'_   Gun Today,  a   Handgun non the less.
Requirements, Fill out the 4473 form,
Have a 'NICKS' check done, (A call to the FBI)
A Valid copy of my 'Purchase or Carry permit'.
Oh, what, was that other thing   ???
Oh Yea that's Right a  'State I.D', (Which in my case, because I drive, was a Drivers License)

raydawg wrote on 08/30/16 at 17:36:00:

Well now I guess you can cast as many votes as you want  

So, if that was reference to the 99.9999%. of  Legal, firearms owners.
Totally un called for.

Well, unless, you stop at a supermarket on your way home, and drive over a bridge, then throw out the food, (when you are over that bridge),  so something living under that bridge, can eat.

MnS, I am about as republican (in the proper sense of the word) as you can get.
I think the monarchy should be dissolved, the palaces and wealth re-distributed to the people.

Meetings between the Queen and the PM are private, not top-secret.
Eg. Tony Blair wrote about them in his autobiography.

In the last 60 years, Govts have come and gone, both Left wing and Right wing. Industries and services have been privatised then Nationalised, then privatised again, depending on the Govt.

Same Queen, many many different Govts.

If the Queen tells the PM what to do each week, (then not only is it news to me, and other anti-royalists)  it would appear that the Queen changes her mind every 4 years.

Or....... she is merely an 90 year old woman who's a figure-head that likes ancient tradition and likes the tourists coming to London to spend their money.

MnS, coming out with BS, being corrected, then not addressing this by saying you don't feed trolls is as laughable as it is ignorant.

Both myself and WebsterMark called out BS about your claims before, and myself and Webby are far from agreeing on 99% of things.

Lose the 'troll' accusations, empower yourself enough to reply, and question anything I've said....
I'd more than welcome anything you might say to challenge the accuracy or truth in anything I've ever said to you.
But that might leave you having to back up your statements, so it's easier for you to say 'I don't feed trolls'

PS. I have a wood-burning stove.

HovisPresley wrote on 08/31/16 at 07:07:37:


Somehow I doubt this.  I suspect this is one of the wealthiest persons / families in the world regardless of what may be reported.  Her wealth is the product of hundreds of years of plundering the resources of countless nation states.  

What say you Hovis?

Best regards,

The family had Diana killed, I imagine.
Diana, being the mother of the royal heirs, was dating a 'Mr Fayed'....but that's another story.


Well, I Wonder How many people were involved?
And I agree.
But you are a conspiracy theorist.

@MnS (continued)

"Your last post gives More, of Your, opinion,
than you have ever said, while I have read you on the TT."

So I've never mentioned my view of guns/abortion/religion in the TT ?  

You say my views lean heavily towards the Labour Party, and you are surprised at this.
I've never voted for the L-P in a general election, but you might be interested to read this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Jeremy_Corbyn#Constitution_
and_Royal_Family

"For as long as I have seen your posts,
you never have, expounded in depth about your views, (in the TT)."

Is it necessary to 'expound in depth' when people here know my views?
I know of a guy that made something up, got caught out, then disappeared for 6 months  

"n fact, a while ago, when you were asked, again, about your ‘one liners’.
In response to a post. And again, you responded, nonsensical.
Then, you said it was, MY Fault.  If I wanted a answer, I was suppose to PM you !"

Nonsensical? Covered that.
If we are talking about the 'Thatcher' subject, I questioned your attitude.
Frankly, I considered it infantile.
I suggested that if you put in so much effort to get my views on Thatcher aired, then instead of b!tching at me, you could have started a new thread or even PM me.
You did neither.
I did actually write a long post about my experience of the Thatcher era, but gremlins had their way: http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1439598043
I didn't re-post it because, well, if you can't even write a legible sentence, why should I bother to "expound in depth"? Plus your attitude.....

Someone here (can't remember, but possibly 'pg') asked me about my views on Nigel Farage. Which I gave.

"Others in the TT, disagree on things, but always explain their position.
You haven’t."

So no-one knows my position on gun culture, abortion, etc?    

Your style of writing ?
I don't need to explain that, Lost Artist even questioned it the other day.
If you want to get your point across, it's much more effective if you write in a way that isn't difficult for people to read.

REALLY,,, its not, that,, difficult !!!! LLOLO

"when you commented on, my, pro-gun, posts,
with the essence of, (you can’t have them, so I shouldn’t have them)"

Ummm.... I've posted here before saying that I legally own 2 revolvers.
I then went on to list the different firearms that I've tried out.
But if you prefer, I can't have them so you can't  

As for the 'welfare in the US'.... I don't remember that, feel free to post a link, and I will respond.
"another thread you said, (It is Ripe here)."
Eh?  

Thomas Hardy? Rings a bell but you might want to post a link.

"Notice, I started referring to you as a, ’Troll’
AFTER,  You said, I, teach kids how to KILL."

No, I didn't. Read it again.
You teach people how to use a machine that was invented to kill people.
Did I mention kids at all?

"You, EARNED, the Title !"
In your view, only.
In 2 years and 900 posts, I've never been called a troll by anyone except for you.
I think you use the "don't feed trolls" as an easy get-out when you are cornered.

But, if we are into name calling, I have a suggestion:

In view of your statements such as "I'm not a British citizen" when my passport clearly says "British citizen", and your claim that there are loads of females that are too scared to post here because of me (even Webby waved the BS flag) I suggest that if you refer to me as a troll, then I will refer to you as a 'bullsh1tter'..... because after all....

"You, EARNED, the Title !"

It's your choice.