What will you do if Brexit is reversed / doesn't happen ?

If Brexit is reversed and doesn't happen what will you do?

  • Go postal and fire bomb government buildings .

    Votes: 35 10.8%
  • Put my gillet vert on and protest.

    Votes: 41 12.7%
  • Stop paying taxes and refuse to cooperate with any government department .

    Votes: 9 2.8%
  • Absolutely nothing and put up with the lack of democracy .

    Votes: 72 22.2%
  • Celebrate the good news .

    Votes: 88 27.2%
  • Campaign for another election.

    Votes: 13 4.0%
  • Something else.

    Votes: 45 13.9%
  • Emigrate .

    Votes: 21 6.5%

  • Total voters
    324

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
Ah poor snowflake! There you go - satire.
Fantastic and correct ruling. Maybe leaving us with two options accept a polished turd or withdraw A50. Taking bets now....
Have you learned nothing from the last two years, they’ll go for the polished turd and convince themselves that it looks, smells and tastes great.
 

Joker62

ADC
Book Reviewer
But it’s optional isn’t it? So they can still do over time? It just means you can to force them to do it?

Or is my understanding wrong?
It's optional at the moment, you can work over the 48hr threshold if you want, but if they restrict it to just the 48hrs or less, it won't be popular.
 
It's optional at the moment, you can work over the 48hr threshold if you want, but if they restrict it to just the 48hrs or less, it won't be popular.
Maybe if it's unpopular, that's because hourly rates are too low? I remember as a security guard we used to almost fight to be "allowed" to work 7 x 12-hr shifts per week. Our contracts said 40 hours per week with the possibility of overtime, but you couldn't live on £2.20 x 40 even in the 1980s!
 
But it’s optional isn’t it? So they can still do over time? It just means you can to force them to do it?

Or is my understanding wrong?
Optional up to a point. Current WTD is 48 hour max with an opt out to allow up to 60 hours over a 17 week rolling average. You can't opt to do more than 60 hours.

Othe rcountries in europe have different rule. My drivers would probably lynch me if I tried to reduce their hours to 48 or less.
 
Maybe if it's unpopular, that's because hourly rates are too low? I remember as a security guard we used to almost fight to be "allowed" to work 7 x 12-hr shifts per week. Our contracts said 40 hours per week with the possibility of overtime, but you couldn't live on £2.20 x 40 even in the 1980s!
No I don't think its just about the hourly rate. Some people want the work.
I have drivers that will try and con me on their rest days so they can work extra, not a problem on tachograph but drivers who mix their week on vans and lorries will try to decieve me on rest hours, I have to check because I cannot trust them to be honest about it.

They want the extra hours.
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
Maybe if it's unpopular, that's because hourly rates are too low? I remember as a security guard we used to almost fight to be "allowed" to work 7 x 12-hr shifts per week. Our contracts said 40 hours per week with the possibility of overtime, but you couldn't live on £2.20 x 40 even in the 1980s!

Our own security guards used to get a new name (they were still security guards they were just taken over by a new firm) reduced terms and conditions, no smell of a pay rise or a cut in hours.

What they did get was a new v neck jumper.
 
No I don't think its just about the hourly rate. Some people want the work.
I have drivers that will try and con me on their rest days so they can work extra, not a problem on tachograph but drivers who mix their week on vans and lorries will try to decieve me on rest hours, I have to check because I cannot trust them to be honest about it.

They want the extra hours.
Maybe I'm being dim (wouldn't be the first time) but are you saying that if they could get the same pay for fewer hours, they'd be unhappy about it?
 
Maybe I'm being dim (wouldn't be the first time) but are you saying that if they could get the same pay for fewer hours, they'd be unhappy about it?
Not quite, what I am saying is that if the hourly rate with lifted to allow 60 hours pay for 48 hours work (effectively what you are saying) they would be unhappy that they weren't allowed to work for 60 hours at the increased rate.

They wouldn't be content with earning the same weekly wage for an increased hourly rate and reduced hours, they would want both the increased rate and the 60 hours.
The same is apparent if I promote somebody on to a higher rate, they still want the hours the were doing before.

I have had drivers openly accuse me of cheating them for making them take their 45 hours weekly rest. Doesn't matter that its the law, I'm stealing hours off them according to their view.

I'm not suggesting that they wouldn't like a higher hourly rate, but I am saying that even with it they wouldn't want to reduce their hours
 
Not quite, what I am saying is that if the hourly rate with lifted to allow 60 hours pay for 48 hours work (effectively what you are saying) they would be unhappy that they weren't allowed to work for 60 hours at the increased rate.

They wouldn't be content with earning the same weekly wage for an increased hourly rate and reduced hours, they would want both the increased rate and the 60 hours.
The same is apparent if I promote somebody on to a higher rate, they still want the hours the were doing before.

I have had drivers openly accuse me of cheating them for making them take their 45 hours weekly rest. Doesn't matter that its the law, I'm stealing hours off them according to their view.

I'm not suggesting that they wouldn't like a higher hourly rate, but I am saying that even with it they wouldn't want to reduce their hours

That makes sense when you explain it like that.
 
That makes sense when you explain it like that.
I have drivers from their early 30's through to their early 70's
Its career that attracts oddballs and quite often loners. There is a standing joke in our factory that distribution is the home for the geriatric diabetic bachelors. It isn't entirely untrue either.

I take a perverse pride in finding a niche for the unemployable and a home for lifes waifes and strays. Most have a simple work ethic, they want the work. I do my level best to give them as much work as they want within the bounds of the law.
I also have drivers who work 3 or 4 days a week, we'll accomadate that too. It make rota's complicated sometimes but in general it works.

Those who work 60 hours a week do so because they ask for the hours, nobody requires them to do so (or at least not in our factory), sometimes we ask people to do a bit extra but there is no penalty or ill will if they don't want to. Even weekend work goes to the voluneers, if I need extra staff I'll ask for volunteers and we get them.

None of it is down to Dickensian working practices, those doing big hours are doing it because they want to. Then you get on to trying to get the buggers to take unused holiday before the year end....
 
I have drivers from their early 30's through to their early 70's
Its career that attracts oddballs and quite often loners. There is a standing joke in our factory that distribution is the home for the geriatric diabetic bachelors. It isn't entirely untrue either.

I take a perverse pride in finding a niche for the unemployable and a home for lifes waifes and strays. Most have a simple work ethic, they want the work. I do my level best to give them as much work as they want within the bounds of the law.
I also have drivers who work 3 or 4 days a week, we'll accomadate that too. It make rota's complicated sometimes but in general it works.

Those who work 60 hours a week do so because they ask for the hours, nobody requires them to do so (or at least not in our factory), sometimes we ask people to do a bit extra but there is no penalty or ill will if they don't want to. Even weekend work goes to the voluneers, if I need extra staff I'll ask for volunteers and we get them.

None of it is down to Dickensian working practices, those doing big hours are doing it because they want to. Then you get on to trying to get the buggers to take unused holiday before the year end....
Know the sort of person you mean. Last place I worked we all had fixed salaries, with just time off in lieu if you did overtime, but we still had one guy who had to be ordered, in no uncertain terms, to reduce his leave backlog from well over 100 days to 30 (we got 28 a year). I think they were considering de-activating his access card and computer login at one stage!

Money wasn't a factor -- he had no life outside work, and had convinced himself the organization would fall apart if he weren't there.
 
Have you learned nothing from the last two years, they’ll go for the polished turd and convince themselves that it looks, smells and tastes great.
The EU is the turd & they haven't even polished it, just told you they have & you believe them.
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
News just in.

Damn, I think they’ve got us where they want us.


[A COPY OF THE BREXIT PROSECUTION TO PRINT OFF]

BREXIT PROSECUTION
today,s date is sunday 17th march 2019
lawyer yvonne pears, representing herself, and the 17.4million people whom voted in the referendum to LEAVE THE EU,

Claimants, lawyer, yvonne pears and
17.4 million people, whom voted to leave the EU
Defendants, the UK Conservative Party,
and the UK Labour Party

1] i, yvonne pears, rebuke in the name of Jesus Christ, anyone whomsoever, tries to prevent or deter my rights to freedom,
and my rights to liberty and justice

2] the uk referendum is under the common law jurisdiction,
where the people are the jury, whom have voted to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, of which stands in law as a judgment,

3] Her Majesty the Queen is the Head of the Church of England,
and she is under Oath to GOD, and GOD,S LAWS,
of which is the COMMON LAW, derived from the Christian Bible,

4] the UK Pound/Sterling, is the Crown Currency, of which is a promise under the Oath of our Queen, to Pay the Bearer,
the oath/contract of the Queen to promise to Pay the Bearer,
is a Christian Contract under Oath to God, under common law, thus proving that our UK currency, is under Christianity,
and GOD,S LAW,

5] when the Queen signed the Article 50 bill into LAW, of which is common law, she fired a starting gun giving
Royal Assent to leave the EU,
and the European Union 'Notification of Withdrawal Bill'
had received it,s final sign off, of which was passed by the MPs and Peers, of whom are under Oath to God, Queen, and Country,

6] the Government and the MP,s are the servants, of the people, of whom accept the Queens pound from the people,
NO government, or MP has any right to overrule, the will of the people, whom are their masters,

7] when in 2017, Theresa May called for a re-election,
where both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party,
promised within their Manifesto, to comply with the referendum results, to leave the EU,
there was NO mention of a Deal with the EU, in their Manifesto,s because they knew that they would have lost the election to UKIP,
in addition, their a refusals to comply with their electoral promises, to their voters, constitutes ELECTION FRAUD,

8] Theresa May, was required to have taken advice from
MP Geoffrey Cox, The Attorney General,
on the lawfulness of her Deal,
due to the fact that it was not included within the referendum,

9] prior to attempting to agree a Deal,
of which is in fact a Treaty, with the EU,
Theresa May was required to take lawful advice about it, from
the Attorney General because it is not in compliance
with the referendum result, and it unlawfully locks us into the EU,
this includes the massive costs against the tax payer, of over two years of trying to enforce a fraudulent Deal,
on the UK people,

10] THE EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE IS REQUIRED,
the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, is required by law, to properly advise the Government, of the law,
Theresa May,s Deal, is an 585 page Treaty, of which cannot be enforced without the EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, of which Theresa May does not have,

CONSENT is an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation of the mind, and the mind weighing, as in balance of good and evil,
it is an act, unclouded by fraud and duress, and
submission is not consent,
consent is an exercise of INTELLIGENCE, based on KNOWLEDGE AND THE UNDERSTANDING of its significance, and there must be
A CHOICE BETWEEN RESISTANCE AND CONSENT,
this is proof, that Theresa May,s Deal/Treaty is a criminal act, because it does NOT, and CANNOT have, CONSENT from the UK, and most of uk people do not understand the 585 page Deal,

11] the Attorney General, is required to Know,
and Understand the LAW, to enable him to properly undertake
his role, in advising the Government,
the Attorney General is required, to Know and Understand,
that the MPs, and most of the UK people, CANNOT CONSENT
to Theresa May,s 585 page Deal/Treaty with the EU,

in addition, the Attorney General, FURTHER proves himself UNFIT, for his role in advising the government on the law,
due to the fact that recently, in the house of parliament,
he publicly stated to the MPs,
"that the letters attached to Theresa May,s Deal, are in compliance with Good faith, and the EU,
have to lawfully comply with Good Faith",
this wrongful advice, created further votes, in favour of the Deal,
yet NO LAW, can uphold Good Faith, unless it is written into a CONTRACT, and the 585 pages are the contract,
of which has NOT been re-opened,

12] the government cannot overthrow the common law referendum result, voted by the people, of whom have a divine right to uphold their common law rights,
and the Queens pound cannot be used to fund,
Anti-Christian Contracts, to overthrow BREXIT,

13] herein, on this day sunday 17th march 2019, lies my claim against the Conservative and Labour Party, and if they do not uphold the referendum result, to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, they will NO LONGER, be recognised by the people, as a Government that represents the people, and they will have no further rights to any financial funding by the uk people, or to stand to be elected ever again,

14] the jury will now decide that the government,
ARE GUILTY, IF,

A, THEY EXTEND ARTICLE 50, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY

B, WE HAVE TO LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL,
IF WE DO NOT LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL
ON THE 29TH MARCH 2019, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,

C] IF THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE UKs RIGHT TO TRADE ON WTO TERMS, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,
 
News just in.

Damn, I think they’ve got us where they want us.


[A COPY OF THE BREXIT PROSECUTION TO PRINT OFF]

BREXIT PROSECUTION
today,s date is sunday 17th march 2019
lawyer yvonne pears, representing herself, and the 17.4million people whom voted in the referendum to LEAVE THE EU,

Claimants, lawyer, yvonne pears and
17.4 million people, whom voted to leave the EU
Defendants, the UK Conservative Party,
and the UK Labour Party

1] i, yvonne pears, rebuke in the name of Jesus Christ, anyone whomsoever, tries to prevent or deter my rights to freedom,
and my rights to liberty and justice

2] the uk referendum is under the common law jurisdiction,
where the people are the jury, whom have voted to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, of which stands in law as a judgment,

3] Her Majesty the Queen is the Head of the Church of England,
and she is under Oath to GOD, and GOD,S LAWS,
of which is the COMMON LAW, derived from the Christian Bible,

4] the UK Pound/Sterling, is the Crown Currency, of which is a promise under the Oath of our Queen, to Pay the Bearer,
the oath/contract of the Queen to promise to Pay the Bearer,
is a Christian Contract under Oath to God, under common law, thus proving that our UK currency, is under Christianity,
and GOD,S LAW,

5] when the Queen signed the Article 50 bill into LAW, of which is common law, she fired a starting gun giving
Royal Assent to leave the EU,
and the European Union 'Notification of Withdrawal Bill'
had received it,s final sign off, of which was passed by the MPs and Peers, of whom are under Oath to God, Queen, and Country,

6] the Government and the MP,s are the servants, of the people, of whom accept the Queens pound from the people,
NO government, or MP has any right to overrule, the will of the people, whom are their masters,

7] when in 2017, Theresa May called for a re-election,
where both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party,
promised within their Manifesto, to comply with the referendum results, to leave the EU,
there was NO mention of a Deal with the EU, in their Manifesto,s because they knew that they would have lost the election to UKIP,
in addition, their a refusals to comply with their electoral promises, to their voters, constitutes ELECTION FRAUD,

8] Theresa May, was required to have taken advice from
MP Geoffrey Cox, The Attorney General,
on the lawfulness of her Deal,
due to the fact that it was not included within the referendum,

9] prior to attempting to agree a Deal,
of which is in fact a Treaty, with the EU,
Theresa May was required to take lawful advice about it, from
the Attorney General because it is not in compliance
with the referendum result, and it unlawfully locks us into the EU,
this includes the massive costs against the tax payer, of over two years of trying to enforce a fraudulent Deal,
on the UK people,

10] THE EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE IS REQUIRED,
the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, is required by law, to properly advise the Government, of the law,
Theresa May,s Deal, is an 585 page Treaty, of which cannot be enforced without the EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, of which Theresa May does not have,

CONSENT is an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation of the mind, and the mind weighing, as in balance of good and evil,
it is an act, unclouded by fraud and duress, and
submission is not consent,
consent is an exercise of INTELLIGENCE, based on KNOWLEDGE AND THE UNDERSTANDING of its significance, and there must be
A CHOICE BETWEEN RESISTANCE AND CONSENT,
this is proof, that Theresa May,s Deal/Treaty is a criminal act, because it does NOT, and CANNOT have, CONSENT from the UK, and most of uk people do not understand the 585 page Deal,

11] the Attorney General, is required to Know,
and Understand the LAW, to enable him to properly undertake
his role, in advising the Government,
the Attorney General is required, to Know and Understand,
that the MPs, and most of the UK people, CANNOT CONSENT
to Theresa May,s 585 page Deal/Treaty with the EU,

in addition, the Attorney General, FURTHER proves himself UNFIT, for his role in advising the government on the law,
due to the fact that recently, in the house of parliament,
he publicly stated to the MPs,
"that the letters attached to Theresa May,s Deal, are in compliance with Good faith, and the EU,
have to lawfully comply with Good Faith",
this wrongful advice, created further votes, in favour of the Deal,
yet NO LAW, can uphold Good Faith, unless it is written into a CONTRACT, and the 585 pages are the contract,
of which has NOT been re-opened,

12] the government cannot overthrow the common law referendum result, voted by the people, of whom have a divine right to uphold their common law rights,
and the Queens pound cannot be used to fund,
Anti-Christian Contracts, to overthrow BREXIT,

13] herein, on this day sunday 17th march 2019, lies my claim against the Conservative and Labour Party, and if they do not uphold the referendum result, to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, they will NO LONGER, be recognised by the people, as a Government that represents the people, and they will have no further rights to any financial funding by the uk people, or to stand to be elected ever again,

14] the jury will now decide that the government,
ARE GUILTY, IF,

A, THEY EXTEND ARTICLE 50, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY

B, WE HAVE TO LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL,
IF WE DO NOT LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL
ON THE 29TH MARCH 2019, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,

C] IF THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE UKs RIGHT TO TRADE ON WTO TERMS, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,
Quite.
 
Optional up to a point. Current WTD is 48 hour max with an opt out to allow up to 60 hours over a 17 week rolling average. You can't opt to do more than 60 hours.

Othe rcountries in europe have different rule. My drivers would probably lynch me if I tried to reduce their hours to 48 or less.
How many hours are they allowed to drive per week out of curiosity?
 
How many hours are they allowed to drive per week out of curiosity?
Thats were it gets complicated.
For drivers we have three sets of laws that are all different
Tachograph Law
Domestic Drivers Hours
Working Time Directive

For ease we'll use tachograph.
Drivers are allowed 90 hours driving per rolling fortnight
Normally that means 45 hours per week but that can be increased to 56 providing the hours are reduced accordingly the week before or the week after.
Drivers are required to have 45 unbroken rest hours per week but that can be reduced to 24 hours alternate weeks, again as long as those rest hours are taken back the following week.
Additionally drivers must have 11 hours daily rest (reduce-able twice a week to 9 hours)

But that's driving hours, not working hours. Realistically working hours can be up to 15 hours as long as they get their daily rest hours. We routinely run 12 hour days and many drivers want 12 hours a day. With van drivers 5x12 hour shifts a week is normal and 6x10 hours isn't unusual.

Working Time Directive dictates different breaks and maximum working hours

Domestic Driving Hours are slightly different again and affect anybody who drives as part of their job, company cars, vans etc
 
Last edited:
News just in.

Damn, I think they’ve got us where they want us.


[A COPY OF THE BREXIT PROSECUTION TO PRINT OFF]

BREXIT PROSECUTION
today,s date is sunday 17th march 2019
lawyer yvonne pears, representing herself, and the 17.4million people whom voted in the referendum to LEAVE THE EU,

Claimants, lawyer, yvonne pears and
17.4 million people, whom voted to leave the EU
Defendants, the UK Conservative Party,
and the UK Labour Party

1] i, yvonne pears, rebuke in the name of Jesus Christ, anyone whomsoever, tries to prevent or deter my rights to freedom,
and my rights to liberty and justice

2] the uk referendum is under the common law jurisdiction,
where the people are the jury, whom have voted to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, of which stands in law as a judgment,

3] Her Majesty the Queen is the Head of the Church of England,
and she is under Oath to GOD, and GOD,S LAWS,
of which is the COMMON LAW, derived from the Christian Bible,

4] the UK Pound/Sterling, is the Crown Currency, of which is a promise under the Oath of our Queen, to Pay the Bearer,
the oath/contract of the Queen to promise to Pay the Bearer,
is a Christian Contract under Oath to God, under common law, thus proving that our UK currency, is under Christianity,
and GOD,S LAW,

5] when the Queen signed the Article 50 bill into LAW, of which is common law, she fired a starting gun giving
Royal Assent to leave the EU,
and the European Union 'Notification of Withdrawal Bill'
had received it,s final sign off, of which was passed by the MPs and Peers, of whom are under Oath to God, Queen, and Country,

6] the Government and the MP,s are the servants, of the people, of whom accept the Queens pound from the people,
NO government, or MP has any right to overrule, the will of the people, whom are their masters,

7] when in 2017, Theresa May called for a re-election,
where both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party,
promised within their Manifesto, to comply with the referendum results, to leave the EU,
there was NO mention of a Deal with the EU, in their Manifesto,s because they knew that they would have lost the election to UKIP,
in addition, their a refusals to comply with their electoral promises, to their voters, constitutes ELECTION FRAUD,

8] Theresa May, was required to have taken advice from
MP Geoffrey Cox, The Attorney General,
on the lawfulness of her Deal,
due to the fact that it was not included within the referendum,

9] prior to attempting to agree a Deal,
of which is in fact a Treaty, with the EU,
Theresa May was required to take lawful advice about it, from
the Attorney General because it is not in compliance
with the referendum result, and it unlawfully locks us into the EU,
this includes the massive costs against the tax payer, of over two years of trying to enforce a fraudulent Deal,
on the UK people,

10] THE EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE IS REQUIRED,
the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, is required by law, to properly advise the Government, of the law,
Theresa May,s Deal, is an 585 page Treaty, of which cannot be enforced without the EXPRESS CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, of which Theresa May does not have,

CONSENT is an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation of the mind, and the mind weighing, as in balance of good and evil,
it is an act, unclouded by fraud and duress, and
submission is not consent,
consent is an exercise of INTELLIGENCE, based on KNOWLEDGE AND THE UNDERSTANDING of its significance, and there must be
A CHOICE BETWEEN RESISTANCE AND CONSENT,
this is proof, that Theresa May,s Deal/Treaty is a criminal act, because it does NOT, and CANNOT have, CONSENT from the UK, and most of uk people do not understand the 585 page Deal,

11] the Attorney General, is required to Know,
and Understand the LAW, to enable him to properly undertake
his role, in advising the Government,
the Attorney General is required, to Know and Understand,
that the MPs, and most of the UK people, CANNOT CONSENT
to Theresa May,s 585 page Deal/Treaty with the EU,

in addition, the Attorney General, FURTHER proves himself UNFIT, for his role in advising the government on the law,
due to the fact that recently, in the house of parliament,
he publicly stated to the MPs,
"that the letters attached to Theresa May,s Deal, are in compliance with Good faith, and the EU,
have to lawfully comply with Good Faith",
this wrongful advice, created further votes, in favour of the Deal,
yet NO LAW, can uphold Good Faith, unless it is written into a CONTRACT, and the 585 pages are the contract,
of which has NOT been re-opened,

12] the government cannot overthrow the common law referendum result, voted by the people, of whom have a divine right to uphold their common law rights,
and the Queens pound cannot be used to fund,
Anti-Christian Contracts, to overthrow BREXIT,

13] herein, on this day sunday 17th march 2019, lies my claim against the Conservative and Labour Party, and if they do not uphold the referendum result, to leave the EU, on the 29th of march 2019, they will NO LONGER, be recognised by the people, as a Government that represents the people, and they will have no further rights to any financial funding by the uk people, or to stand to be elected ever again,

14] the jury will now decide that the government,
ARE GUILTY, IF,

A, THEY EXTEND ARTICLE 50, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY

B, WE HAVE TO LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL,
IF WE DO NOT LEAVE THE EU WITHOUT A DEAL
ON THE 29TH MARCH 2019, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,

C] IF THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE UKs RIGHT TO TRADE ON WTO TERMS, THE GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY,
Sounds like a bit of a nutter.

What's their username?
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
Sounds like a bit of a nutter.

What's their username?
Take your pick. I’d go for one of the brexiters who have suddenly become armchair generals on here explaining how Blighty could have defeated the hun single handed.
(Sort of forgetting the men and materiel from America, the sacrifice of the Russians. And the money from the Marshall plan)
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top