Is there a Conspiracy to Get Rid of David Cameron and Radically Alter the Face of UK Politics?

a reply to: eletheia

Naughty naught - I heard on the tv this morning that Boris is a contender for the picture of this act, but there are supposedly 6 pictures floating around.

The trouble is if you took the photo you were there to and do others have pictures of your ……..

In a few years time we will see those being actioned at Southerby's or some such place on the net, you'll get your chance then if not before.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Shiloh7



IMHO "Get Rid of David Cameron and Radically Alter the Face of UK Politics" would make a great tee-shirt slogan.

Get rid of David Cameron by putting his frozen corpse through a industrial mulcher then feeding the pieces to the gulls at Margate pier, would be better.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

You're right if you are thinking to act against someone else you are conspiring, simple as that.

I see the difference though in context - are you a rival toothpaste firm?

The conspiracy we talk about usually on this site is more serious and aimed usually involved defrauding the public of either money or choice (in black and white).

Many of the governmental conspiracies involve situations like our Dr Kelly's death. These are aimed to destroy someone or something politically, financially and invariably their character and public standing. One question is should a pontificating toff be allowed to live a double standing right under everyone's nose?

Remember here its not just about sick rituals, you are also looking at conspiracy to defraud the inland revenue. Condoning through membership of a particular group, a hate for poor people, whilst you have charge of things that directly affect their lives. It does actually run far deeper than that because of the power a PM has and his credibility with the public, especially the multitude of poor people here now. Should they trust someone with his background?

a reply to: Soloprotocol

As long as we can do that to Madam Krankie as well, I'm up for that...

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Can;t quite condone that sentiment but I do agree Cameron needs to go. I notice today he's hopped it to Europe - I suspect he will be grateful for his away day commitments.

a reply to: anonentity

I suspect that is why Jeremy Corbyn has been elected because we already know our utilities were sold off way too cheap, have made fantastic profits and paid huge salaries for selling something everyone has to have - no talent needed there. Our tariffs are deliberately misleading and worse than anything these private companies have ripped us off.

I want some of our best assets nationalised and the price originally paid for them plus the current BOE interest rate of .?% only paid to compensate. We could start back up our brilliant apprenticeship training within them again which obviously people like Thatcher hated.

a reply to: rnaa

Are you not curious as to whom is going to enter centre stage and do you have a personal choice between either Osborne or Boris - or perhaps someone new will pop up?

There are an awful lot of faces on the Tory Front Bench that a new broom could sweep away - I suspect the secrets, especially about the Westminster paedophile would flow and we could well get some proper convictions throughout the floors of Westminster which is morally needed, if nothing else.

a reply to: stumason

We are in very interesting times because if Scotland leaves the UK as apparently its First `lady wants, our place in the world will be vastly diminished. If we vote to leave the EU which is a strong possibility also, our country will change dramatically.

I lived through a period of virtual full employment. I remember ~Heath offering a 13% pay rise to the miners etc. We won't see those days back but I don't doubt the people here will rise to the challenge and take full advantage of the wealth of this country and we will do better than we are. Getting rid of EU rules and regs will benefit us considerably. A lot here needs a complete overhaul but with a government concentrating on here instead of busying itself in other country's business and investing here, we could have a future to look forward to if we can sweep out the vested interest lot.

People forget we are a country with the infrastructure for them to easily export to here where there is a huge market - no one will refuse to trade with us and we have expertise to offer the world, I very much doubt we will sink into obscurity.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: anonentity

I suspect that is why Jeremy Corbyn has been elected because we already know our utilities were sold off way too cheap, have made fantastic profits and paid huge salaries for selling something everyone has to have - no talent needed there. Our tariffs are deliberately misleading and worse than anything these private companies have ripped us off.

I want some of our best assets nationalised and the price originally paid for them plus the current BOE interest rate of .?% only paid to compensate. We could start back up our brilliant apprenticeship training within them again which obviously people like Thatcher hated.

How do you nationalise something foreign owned without kicking up a huge s*!# storm? Serious question there. Most of our utility companies are foreign owned.....

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: rnaa

Are you not curious as to whom is going to enter centre stage and do you have a personal choice between either Osborne or Boris - or perhaps someone new will pop up?

There are an awful lot of faces on the Tory Front Bench that a new broom could sweep away - I suspect the secrets, especially about the Westminster paedophile would flow and we could well get some proper convictions throughout the floors of Westminster which is morally needed, if nothing else.

I think, as it stands at the moment, Osbourne is a shoo in as next leader of the Conservatives. Frankly, he is a bloody good politician whether you agree with his policies or not. He is also a damn good Chancellor, which i have to confess i certainly didn't expect.

As to the Westminster paedophile, im not even sure if i believe the story anymore. The "credibile witness" it turns out has been labelled a liar in court by a Judge (proven) and there is no evidence whatsoever for any of the alleged crimes. More than that, the MET have now said they were wrong to initially refer to him as credible witness. He has also previously made false statements regarding other matters and also claimed responsibility for acts that he had nothing to do with. All of this is adding up to "fantasist". If there is any shred of truth in the matter then it is unfortunate that such an unreliable person is the only link.

a reply to: Shiloh7

On the "virtual full employment" - it was also a time of low productivity and 13% pay rises to miners is what eventually led to them doing themselves out of a job, by demanding far more money for a product whose price was low. There are always two sides to a coin.

I am generally against state owned businesses except where there is a clear national interest - water and power, being necessities, should be at least controlled if not owned by the State. Apart from that, the State shouldn't interfere.

On the EU note - even if we leave, they will negotiate a trade agreement off the bat, they cannot afford not to. The UK could easily just join the EFTA (which it was a founding member of). I am currently in the "leave the EU" camp.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: anonentityI suspect that is why Jeremy Corbyn has been elected because we already know our utilities were sold off way too cheap,.

Privatisation of the utilities happened years ago. Thatcher has also gone. Move on.

People think that nationalising is a good thing. I used to travel by British Rail, so I can tell you it was awful. I travel by train a lot today and it's much better, albeit costly. However, either the customer pays of the taxpayer pays. The government cannot manage a piss-up in a brewery, so no evidence they be able to manage complex industries. The nationalisation experiment went terribly wrong in the UK. Politicians and trade unions destroyed large sectors though mismanagement and greed. Remember the native car industry in the UK that was destroyed by industrial relations and "rescued" by the government!

Corbyn is living in dream-land if he thinks nationalisation will cure anything. It won't.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Shiloh7



IMHO "Get Rid of David Cameron and Radically Alter the Face of UK Politics" would make a great tee-shirt slogan.

Get rid of David Cameron by putting his frozen corpse through a industrial mulcher then feeding the pieces to the gulls at Margate pier, would be better.

I think the gulls would prefer Salmon(d) and Sturgeon, much more compatible with their usual diet as long as they can swallow the bile, fat and gristle that the combined pair would produce.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: anonentity

I suspect that is why Jeremy Corbyn has been elected because we already know our utilities were sold off way too cheap, have made fantastic profits and paid huge salaries for selling something everyone has to have - no talent needed there. Our tariffs are deliberately misleading and worse than anything these private companies have ripped us off.

I want some of our best assets nationalised and the price originally paid for them plus the current BOE interest rate of .?% only paid to compensate. We could start back up our brilliant apprenticeship training within them again which obviously people like Thatcher hated.

I can speak of one previously fully nationalised industry - the post office (now known as Royal Mail Group) where inept management, a ridiculously aggressive union and a financial approach that was decades behind its time meant it ran at a regular loss until the mid '90s when management grew a pair and started to reduce waste.

I think some people on here need to take off those rose tinted glasses. Next you will be saying that National Rail was a shining example of industry excelling due to its ownership by the state when in fact it was an absolute joke.

a reply to: uncommitted

Next you will be saying that National Rail was a shining example of industry excelling due to its ownership by the state when in fact it was an absolute joke.

The U.K. tax payer still pays a £2 billion subsidy per annum to the private rail companies, whilst those very safe rail companies paid out a divided of £200 million to their shareholders.

That is what you call a " joke "

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: uncommitted

Next you will be saying that National Rail was a shining example of industry excelling due to its ownership by the state when in fact it was an absolute joke.

The U.K. tax payer still pays a £2 billion subsidy per annum to the private rail companies, whilst those very safe rail companies paid out a divided of £200 million to their shareholders.

That is what you call a " joke "

The "joke" is assuming that national rail was in some way better. If it was cheaper (although that is hard to quantify so long after the event) it was due more to lack of investment in infrastructure, running stock and long term planning.

a reply to: Shiloh7


That's a difficult one as its not just this government, its also all previous

governments, and includes the US and many other countries world wide.

Portugal is the only country where it is legal, contrary to popular

conception it is not legal in the Netherlands, authority just has a softer

approach and turns a blind eye.

Perhaps Portugal is being looked at as a learning curve by other countries

as it appears to not be having much in the way of detrimental effects?


Currently we are having to deal with the *legal* stuff and locally to me here

the problem is increasing ....


Personally I think schools should educate in *PSHE* along with health and

sex education.

a reply to: uncommitted

The "joke" is assuming that national rail was in some way better

At least private shareholders weren't taking money out of a industry at the tax payers expenses.

If the rail companies need £2 billion from the tax payer,then how on earth can they pay out dividends. The tax payer is being ripped off yet again.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: uncommitted

The "joke" is assuming that national rail was in some way better

At least private shareholders weren't taking money out of a industry at the tax payers expenses.

If the rail companies need £2 billion from the tax payer,then how on earth can they pay out dividends. The tax payer is being ripped off yet again.

I'm not sure about that. From what I understand a chunk of the actual infrastructure is still within the power of the state and it's that that receives the largest subsidy, but I could be wrong. If you don't think private companies have invested and should therefore be entitled to a return on their investment then that is really a matter of looking at economics in a capitalist society.

originally posted by: Shiloh7


Naughty naught - I heard on the tv this morning that Boris is a contender for the picture of this act, but there are supposedly 6 pictures floating around.

You know the old saying >> He who is without sin, cast the first stone ...

I bet there are many in Westminster sweating profusely ... LOL!!

and more than a few skeletons rattling around in a few cupboards!!!

The trouble is if you took the photo you were there to and do others have pictures of your ……..

In a few years time we will see those being actioned at Southerby's or some such place on the net, you'll get your chance then if not before.

Couldn't have been easy then .... that surely would have been pre mobile phones?

Maybe it is Ashcroft who has the photos so he's holding the 'ace'