web analytics

Ahhh

By Patrick Van Roy On November 28th, 2020

92 Responses to “Ahhh”

  1. ‘Identifiable soldiers in uniform standing facing each other in open combat’, blah blah blah.

  2. Unless he was killed by other Iranians, that does not apply.

    You have a mental block on the rules of war.

  3. It doesn’t apply?

    Identifiable soldiers in uniform standing facing each other in open combat not faceless murderers in civilian clothes murdering innocents? ‘It doesn’t apply’ to your double standards made up rules, maybe.

    Once again your ‘do as I say, not as I do’ insincere fraud is showing itself.

  4. No Paul…. as usual you are totally wrong.

    War between seperate nations have very few rules, you are mentally incapable of understanding that donning a face mask and killing your neighbors is not war, not a revolution, nor a civil war.

    It is terrorism.

    This was NOT an upset Iranian that killed him, it was an assassin. An honourable role in war between rival nations.

  5. War between seperate nations have very few rules

    That claim is total and absolute made up balls.

    It was an assassin. An honourable role in war between rival nations.

    A faceless murderer that melted back into civilian society. The same that you accuse others of.

  6. Patrick is clearly just having a laugh with his comments on this thread.

  7. A faceless murderer that melted back into civilian society. The same that you accuse others of.

    Nonsense the Assassin was not faceless. He/she holds a rank in The Mossad, The CIA, or the Saudi GID. And served their country with distinction, following orders from legal chains of command……. a concept beyond your thinking.

  8. No I think he is going off the rails today, must be turnip derangement syndrome

  9. This was murder, but we expect nothing less from the Israeli terror state. At least they didn’t forge an Irish passport this time.

    I recommend the series Tehran about Israeli spies in Iran. It’s from an Israeli point of view but pure entertainment.

  10. Nonsense the Assassin was not faceless. He/she holds a rank in The Mossad, The CIA, or the Saudi GID

    A faceless murderer that melted back into civilian society. The same that you accuse others of.

    Ahistorical ‘don’t do as I do, do as I say’ balls.

    Blatant, brass necked double standards that you condemn of others.

  11. A Sniper is a Highly Honoured Elite Skill and among the most respected titles to hold in all the worlds military. Each and everyone are professional Assassins. Men and Women of the highest Duty, Honor, and Discipline.

    Nothing like the twisted malignant mind of someone who believes that killing other civilians over a political beef is legitimate.

    You confuse yourselves over a matter that a large part of you are culturally unable to grasp. The concept of legitimate rules has been so watered down over the centuries that you are just unable to not only acknowledge it, but are blind to it. It is a scar that has thickened over generations. It’s understandable, but it’s still wrong.

  12. Colm would I do that ?

  13. We all know that Patrick is the biggest supporter of terrorism on this site. Patrick’s opposition to terrorism ends when he supports the terrorist (which is pretty regular).

  14. A Sniper is a Highly Honoured Elite Skill and among the most respected titles to hold in all the worlds military. Each and everyone are professional Assassins. Men and Women of the highest Duty, Honor, and Discipline.

    You know that the IRA had very effective snipers, yeah?

    You confuse yourselves over a matter that a large part of you are culturally unable to grasp.

    More garbeled balls.

  15. You know that the IRA had very effective snipers, yeah?

    No they had Terrorist Animals that could shoot at great distance. No Snipers.

  16. More garbeled balls.

    no, simple fact

  17. No Snipers.

    Yes, snipers. Both individuals and in teams.

    You’re talking subjectively concocted, made up balls.

  18. //I recommend the series Tehran about Israeli spies in Iran. It’s from an Israeli point of view but pure entertainment.//

    It was great TV but I found the Israeli bias a bit too much to take.
    Actually I watched the series each evening together with an Iranian and an Arab, and strangely, or maybe not so strange, this Irishman was the only one who was on the side of the Iranians throughout, hoping the female agent would be caught etc. Our Arab girl was too sentimental and went along with what the director wanted her to feel.

    In the end, I refused to watch the last episode as I couldn’t bear watch what they would do with that wonderful elderly Iranian secret service man, whose wife had been killed.

  19. I understand your view, I sympathize and feel sorrow for your history. I am Irish Catholic.

    That does not and never will justify the actions of a few Irish that lost their humanity and descended into agents of Terror.

    Sorry, but it’s judgement, a stain that will forever mark the Irish people. That is what you are institutionally and generationally unable to grasp.

    With all my heart I wish I could change that, but it is an historical stain that will never be wiped from the scrolls. It will also always be a bone of contention between me and the rest of you. It does not mean I don’t love you, it only means we disagree.

  20. What platform is that available on? Is it available on any of the streaming channels?

  21. “That does not and never will justify the actions of a few Irish that lost their humanity and descended into agents of Terror.”

    You have no problem with terrorism. You are the biggest supporter of terrorism on these pages. For you the difference between a terrorist and any other description is whether you like them or not.

  22. I understand your view, I sympathize and feel sorrow for your history. I am Irish Catholic

    No problem. You’re still talking subjectively concocted made up ‘don’t do as I do, do as I say’ double standard balls though.

  23. in your view

  24. Yes, in response to your made up, unsupported double standards view.

  25. I didn’t make it up, the civilised world did.

  26. //What platform is that available on? Is it available on any of the streaming channels?//

    Paul, it’s on AppleTV. But, true to form, our Iranian was able to crack it and we got it free, often with strange combinations of sub-titles.

  27. Nope, you made up the ‘Identifiable soldiers in uniform standing facing each other in open combat’, blah blah blah’ rule and then made up the ‘War between seperate nations have very few rules’ rules.

    You’re talking hypocritical, fraudulent balls.

  28. Thanks Noel. I don’t have Apple TV but I’ll search for it on Prime, Netflix or HBO.

  29. “…this Irishman was the only one who was on the side of the Iranians throughout, hoping the female agent would be caught etc.”

    Lol same here. I wanted her to get caught from the start.

    Paul, I also got it free but had to get the torrent and subtitle files separately and then combine. It was a little awkward.

  30. Patrick

    Your comment that sending Assasins to murder civilians in cold blood is a ‘noble act’ can only be treated as a deliberate wind up, unless you really do think murder is a laudable thing.

  31. Thanks Petr, I’ll see if I can sort somthing.

    As I said on another thread Colm, I like to think that Pat posts this transparently shallow rubbish as a means to provoke debate rather than blindly believing such stupidity.

  32. //unless you really do think murder is a laudable thing.//

    Murder sometimes is a laudable thing. It all depends on your political perspective.
    I can’t imagine anyone who’d reject murder in all circumstances.

  33. Noel

    They wouldn’t call it murder when they approve of it. It then becomes a ‘military act’ or a ‘Judicial killing’. Iran is not in a state of war with Israel or the US so if individuals sent by those countries carried this killing it’s just common murder, and indeed even if they were in a legal state of war , killings carried out like this would be a war crime.

  34. //They wouldn’t call it murder when they approve of it. It then becomes a ‘military act’ or a ‘Judicial killing’. Iran is not in a state of war with Israel or the US so if individuals sent by those countries carried this killing it’s just common murder, and indeed even if they were in a legal state of war , killings carried out like this would be a war crime.///

    Colm, it doesn’t matter what “they” call it; “they” are fools and hypocrites. The fact is that some murders, illegal killings, are good. Everyone must agree with that, even if what’s good or not will depend on who’s speaking.

    As for Israel getting away with war crimes, that, and its continuation breach of international law, even according to treaties that Israel signed, has been going on for years and very few people in the west care about it.
    If an Iranian agent were to murder an Israeli scientist in Israel, it would generally be considered justification for war. Just as most in the west, or at least in the US, would consider Israel justified in using nuclear weapons if it were to be invaded and dismantled by some aggressor. But of course Israel can invade and dismantle its neighbour and easily gets away with it.

    So, again, there’s no point bothering with what “they” say or think. It’s simply a matter of might is right.

  35. The world turns a blind eye to Israel developing nuclear weapons.
    the world turns a blind eye to Israel stopping other countries developing nuclear weapons.

  36. All you need to know, about Patrick’s honesty and double standards.

    Patrick
    My self esteem is fine, you clowns consider me a Liar, a Bigot, a promoter of terrorism and mass murder who gleefully wants to carpet bomb children…… among other things you’ve all called me.

    It certainly isn’t my view.

    The Troll, on December 11th, 2016 at 4:02 PM Said:

    ….
    I am an American Conservative. I am a firm believer and supporter of the rule “if it’s good for America it can’t be wrong” even if it’s carpet bombing a village of orphans.

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.atangledweb.org/?p=66512

  37. The world turns a blind eye to Israel developing nuclear weapons.

    Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades. It has never threatened to destroy any of its many enemies in the region.

    Iran has threatened to destroy Israel on many occasions and it has been developing a nuclear weapons capability (on and off) for at least twenty years. The target of this killing has been described as the Robert Oppenheimer of Iran and the Israelis were totally entitled to take him out. The Middle East is a little less dangerous as a result.

  38. Peter.

    I respect you mate.
    But I think your opinions on Israel and the middle East, are short-sighted to say the least. I’m not taking sides, but it’s not the good guy, bad guy scenario you think it is.

  39. Iran chose to be Israel’s enemy , not vice versa

    The countries were once friends. El Al flew into Tehran for years.

    Even under the Islamic Republic, Israel tried to restore relations. They’d like to restore relations now.

    Their overtures have been greeted with hatred every time.

  40. Dave

    I’m not a big fan of Israel, especially under the belligerent and corrupt Bibi. But it has a right to exist, and a nuclear armed Iran would be a clear and present danger to the entire region. So to my mind the killing yesterday was justified. Most of the other states in the region will have quietly applauded it.

  41. Dave If you keep making a topic of me I will ban You and it won’t be a warning shot and it won’t be a suspension.

  42. Colm, on November 28th, 2020 at 4:33 PM Said: Edit Comment
    Patrick

    Your comment that sending Assasins to murder civilians in cold blood is a ‘noble act’ can only be treated as a deliberate wind up, unless you really do think murder is a laudable thing.

    Colm I never said any such thing. The Person was not a Civilian.

  43. “Dave If you keep making a topic of me I will ban You and it won’t be a warning shot and it won’t be a suspension.”

    Seriously grow the fuck up, you small petulant child. You made comments about the personal values of the people who disagreed with you. If you don’t like people doing the same then don’t do it yourself.

    Banning people, or threatening to ban people, for disagreeing with you, and pointing out your hypocrisy (using your own words) is utterly fucking patheic, and everyone can see through it. So now people can’t “slander” you by pointing out the truth, and they can’t disagree with you either (by using your own words).

    And then, like the hypocrite you are, you gurn like a little bitch on another thread about censorship.

  44. No I’m dead serious.

    What Part of the last month did you not understand?

    I know Dave understood it and continues.

    All you need to know, about Patrick’s honesty

    I suppose that’s not calling me a Liar.

  45. We’ve arguments and disagreements on every thread. I even purposefully picked a Fight over the IRA and nobody impugned anyone.

    Dave insists on continuing it he will go.

    It’s not censorship. That is the Rule, Insult, Argue, tell the person they are wrong or stupid.

    Impune or Slander them by calling them a Liar. You’re gone.

  46. Patrick

    You said assassinations like this one were honourable. He is a civilian, scientist. Not a military man in uniform. He was targeted not as part of an open military battle, but by gunmen spraying his car with bullets . It was absolutely no different to a terrorist attack. It’s possible to argue a defence of it in purely ‘My team scored a goal’ grounds but not on any grounds of so called acceptable rules of conflict.

  47. He works for both the military and the Government. He’s not a civilian.

  48. “I suppose that’s not calling me a Liar.”

    And you agreed not more than a week ago (the last time you derailed a thread because you were losing an argument) that it would be fair of you to not accuse someone of calling you a liar when they haven’t called you a liar. You banned Seimi (eventually agreeing that it was a low blow on your point) when he didn’t call you a liar. Dave didn’t either. So stop making the same bullshit excuses in the case of Dave that you tried and failed to do with Seimi.

    Calling you out on your bullshit is not calling you a liar.

    “What Part of the last month did you not understand?”

    We all understand what the last month has been about. It isn’t about people calling you a liar. It isn’t about people ‘slandering’ you. It isn’t about people ‘harrassing’ you. It is that you a small, petty child who can’t get an erection unless he is bullying people here.

    When you are losing an argument (which is most arguments because you are a shit debator who simply parrots back what ever far-right bullshit he’s read or heard that day) you can’t take it. So you derail the thread, get into fights and then try to act like King Dick when that happens.

    Seriously grow the fuck up.

  49. So if the Iranians sent a team to Tel Aviv and they pumped bullets into a car leaving a military HQ that contained office staff who don’t hold any military rank , they would be fair targets because they ‘work for the Military’ ?

  50. Seamus this has nothing to do with an argument it has to do with the rules.

  51. So if the Iranians sent a team to Tel Aviv and they pumped bullets into a car leaving a military HQ that contained office staff who don’t hold any military rank , they would be fair targets because they ‘work for the Military’ ?

    YES

  52. “Seamus this has nothing to do with an argument it has to do with the rules.”

    What rule? The rule that you can’t disagree with you when you’re in a bad mood? Dave didn’t call you a liar. And you agreed that one of the rules (and made some spiel – that is now clearly bullshit – that the rules applied to you) one of the rules was that you wouldn’t accuse someone of calling you a liar unless they had actually called you a liar. So again grow the fuck up. Stop derailing threads because you are losing an argument.

  53. The rule that if you call me a Liar I throw you out of my house.

  54. Seamus I’m not discussing it. Dave without a doubt called me a Liar.

    I’ve made my position perfectly clear.

  55. “The rule that if you call me a Liar I throw you out of my house.”

    Firstly you are house-sitting, it isn’t your house.

    He didn’t call you a liar. One of the rules is that you don’t accuse people of calling you a liar unless they had actually called you a liar. So was the whole “the rules apply to you” a lie?

    “I’ve made my position perfectly clear.”

    Yes. It is that you are a small, petty prick of a man who will derail a thread because you are losing an argument.

  56. “Dave without a doubt called me a Liar.”

    There you go breaking the rules. The first person to use the word liar was you. It is a lie to say that Dave called you a liar. Stop lying.

  57. Oh no not all this again.

    Dave was calling you a hypocrite Patrick, and using two quotes which I don’t think you can deny were genuine quotes of yours. Yes it can be annoying when people drag up quotes even from years ago, but that’s the nature of the internet. You really have to be more thick skinned about it Patrick. If he posted something you hadn’t written and claimed it was yours you would have a case, but you really can’t threaten to ban someone for linking to previous genuine comments of yours. it’s a risk we all have to take when we have years of comments online we have posted.

  58. Colm go back to the other conversation….. the one about the Iranians.

    If you are in the military, if you are an elected official, if you work for a government even as a file clerk let alone a research scientist, you are a legitimate target of any country that is at war with your country.

    If you are a citizen sitting in a bar, or walking down the street that has no connection to the government then you’re a civilian, and should not be a target.

  59. “If you are in the military, if you are an elected official, if you work for a government even as a file clerk let alone a research scientist, you are a legitimate target of any country that is at war with your country.”

    Israel and Iran are not at war. This was an act of terrorism.

    Also the majority of Israeli civilians are a member of the Israeli military. Every Israeli over the age of 18 and under the age of 40 is in the Israeli military. Does that mean that attacks on Israeli civilians is now acceptable due to their ties to the military?

  60. Iran declared war on both the US and Israel decades ago.

    We are at war by their choosing.

    Also the majority of Israeli civilians are a member of the Israeli military. Every Israeli over the age of 18 and under the age of 40 is in the Israeli military. Does that mean that attacks on Israeli civilians is now acceptable due to their ties to the military?

    Yes for all accept the children whose schools are bombarded by missile attacks on regular basis.

  61. “Iran declared war on both the US and Israel decades ago.”

    Please show the declaration.

    “Yes for all accept the children whose schools are bombarded by missile attacks on regular basis.”

    You’ve accepted in the past that attacks on civilians are acceptable as collateral damage. In fact you seem to be having a hissy fit with Dave over his pointing that out. So if the school teacher (who in addition to being a possible Israeli military member is also someone who works for the Israeli government) is a legitimate target then surely, by your bizarre logic, the attacks on the schools are legitimate?

  62. Collateral damage is just that collateral NOT the attended target. Schools are never legitimate targets period. All civilized people understand and recognize that.

    Is it a government building, are the teachers government employees ? YES but they are surrounded by children in a building designated for children.

    Once again you demand black and white where you know both. That it’s grey, and two that humans don’t target children.

    Now if the teachers are alone having a conference off school grounds or after hours and you want to target them…. then fair game.

  63. “Schools are never legitimate targets period. All civilized people understand and recognize that.”

    And yet the Israelis bombed 24 schools in Gaza during the 2014 war. I guess the Israelis aren’t civilised then?

    “Is it a government building, are the teachers government employees ? YES but they are surrounded by children in a building designated for children.”

    So the targeting of government or military personnel is unacceptable if there is likely to be large numbers of child casualties then? Because nearly one in ten people killed by the Israelis during the 2014 Gaza war were children. So why are Israel not held to that standard?

  64. Now if the teachers are alone having a conference off school grounds or after hours and you want to target them…. then fair game.

    No

    That’s completely insane

  65. Patrick

    Dave If you keep making a topic of me I will ban You and it won’t be a warning shot and it won’t be a suspension.

    So now legitimate criticism of you is reason for a ban.
    You really are the lowest of the low Patrick.
    Ban me if you want, I don’t give a f*** you turd.

  66. Seamus.
    Thanks mate. You’re a good guy.

  67. god bless you too Dave

  68. No

    That’s completely insane

    To you yes, but they are government employees, and members of the Israeli Military. That makes the Teachers themselves legitimate targets in Israel.

    Just not when they are around the children.

  69. Being a government employee does not make you any sort of target

    The crossing guard in front of the kindergarten is a government employee

  70. Government employees are legitimate targets. Now you and I may understand that there are still grey areas even in that Phantom, but there are others here that consider all government workers especially because they are members of the military like every adult in Israel that it’s black and white.

    We are not debating with people with a normal view of right and wrong. We debate with people whose interest isn’t the topic of the conversation they’re interest is only in proving holes in anything the other person says.

    I said Government workers are legitimate targets, members of the military are legitimate targets. So the morally duplicit and deficient of the site went right for the fact that all Israeli’s are in the military and teachers work for the government.

    It’s sick, but it’s right where they went. So since they want to kill teachers and especially jewish ones all I did was set the parameters of where and how they could fulfill their bloodlust and not violate the rules of the civilized world.

  71. Cheers Dave.

    “Now you and I may understand that there are still grey areas even in that Phantom, but there are others here that consider all government workers especially because they are members like every adult in Israel that it’s black and white.”

    Actually no. You are the one who wanted to pretend that government workers, all government workers, were legitimate targets.

    If you are in the military, if you are an elected official, if you work for a government even as a file clerk let alone a research scientist, you are a legitimate target of any country that is at war with your country.

    Apologies for quoting your previous statement – I know that triggers you.

    You are the one you claimed that government workers are legitimate targets. No one else, not a single person, advanced that argument other than you.

    “We debate with people whose interest isn’t the topic of the conversation they’re interest is only in proving holes in anything the other person says.”

    Well not the only interest. If it was then this place wouldn’t be that interesting as pointing out the holes in your reasoning isn’t that difficult. There are fewer holes in swiss cheese after all. But, given you are playing the man instead of the ball again (typical Patrick – that’s your other tactic when losing an argument is to just start insulting people – that and threatening to ban them), it would be useful to point out what actually happened.

    You support this terrorism (like you support many forms of terrorism – you are the biggest terror supporter on this site). And when people pointed out your support for this terrorism you tried to justify this terrorism with some bullshit ‘rules’. And like the ‘rules’ you’ve made for this site not even you actually believe in them. But you claimed that you believed them and so I applied your rules to other situations (namely the targeting of Israeli civilians – which would be acceptable under your rules). And rather than admit that your rules were bullshit and that your justification for supporting this terrorism was bullshit you decided to get huffy with me and start pretending I support targeting teachers (for the avoidance of doubt and for the slow readers in the room – likely still you Patrick – I don’t support targeting teachers and would view it as the act of terrorism that it is). As for the ‘especially jewish ones’ it is worth noting that between the two of us you are the only one of us that posts anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on this site so I would get off your horse.

  72. You are the one you claimed that government workers are legitimate targets. No one else, not a single person, advanced that argument other than you.

    That is a long standing line. Not just by me but by world governments and a line strongly expressed on this site. You support people that don’t understand that line, and this topic of who is and is not a legitimate target has taken place here on this site for decades.

    It is a hole in your thinking and view that has been ingrained in you through your individual cultural experience and your view is not the worlds social norm.

    There are holes in my arguments, just as there are holes in yours Seamus the difference is your view of right and wrong were shaped by being raised on the persecuted side of the troubles. You are a victim. A persons whose views are influenced by that persecution.

    It doesn’t make you right or wrong, but it definitely clouds your judgement on certain topics, this being one of them.

  73. ” Not just by me but by world governments and a line strongly expressed on this site. You support people that don’t understand that line, and this topic of who is and is not a legitimate target has taken place here on this site for decades.”

    Actually I don’t. For someone who gurns and moans about ‘slander’ you seem to enjoy just making shit up about people.

    “just as there are holes in yours Seamus”

    Such as. You seem to be unable to find any, and instead are just making sweeping, insulting statements about me, my views and my cultural experiences.

    “That is a long standing line. “

    And so are you now back on the all government workers are legitimate targets line? Again you are the only one arguing that, not world governments, not anyone else on this site. Just you. In order to justify your support for terrorism.

  74. Government employees are legitimate targets.

    Yes Patrick for sure. The guy the Israelis killed yesterday was an employee of the terror-supporting murderous regime of Iran and the world is a little safer now he’s gone because the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb has been set back at least for now.

    But both sides can play at that game. The Iranians will extract revenge in their own time and they have so many targets they must feel spoiled for choice. The Israelis will be on high alert, but the retaliation could hit any one or more of at least 20 other countries, including the USA. Those Saudi oilfields are vulnerable.

  75. That’s War Peter.

    It’s the curse of our species.

  76. As some one who is Christian i find it difficult to understand how anyone can gloat and celebrate the death of another human being.
    Was this a good man? Probably not.
    I dislike intensely numerous people on this planet and the world may be a better place without them in it but i don’t wish anyone dead.
    It’s what separates us surely.

  77. It’s a good point JM, and no one here is raising a hand of violence against anyone. However for the sake of human observance there are men in the world that the world would be better off without. A decision never lightly made, but made none the less.

    When a situation of war exists that list becomes immensely broad. It is a sad commentary on our species, but it is a fact.

    We should all walk like jesus, but being mortal men we shall fail and others among us go out of their way to walk an exact opposite path.

  78. As some one who is Christian i find it difficult to understand how anyone can gloat and celebrate the death of another human being.

    Absolutely spot-on JM.
    Some so-called hypocritical Christians take it a step further, and advocate the bombing by their own military, of innocent children.
    Which is about as un-Christian as you can be.

  79. Wow, some verbal somersaults and moral acrobatics going on here. It’s wrong to bomb schools because they’re places where children congregate yet it’s okay to carpet bomb villages full of orphans?

    In which surreal universe are those two sentiments compatible?

    As for civilians being killed, Too bad….wrong place wrong time….shit happens.

  80. Well said Paul.
    I have a great deal of respect for you mate. Like many decent people have post on here, you’ve always shown heartfelt honesty, and truthfulness.

    I don’t have any respect for people who repeatedly justify and even gloat in the bombing of innocent civilians when ‘their side’ does it. The type of hypocrites, who’ve exercised a double standard on this site for many years now. The ype of hypocrite that has zero credibility, never provide any evidence for their claims, repeatedly hold others to a standard which they massively fail to meet themselves.
    I genuinely hope we can meet up on day mate.

  81. As some one who is Christian i find it difficult to understand how anyone can gloat and celebrate the death of another human being.

    WTAF? Should we not have celebrated Bin Laden’s death?

  82. Thank you Dave, that’s appreciated.

    I genuinely hope we can meet up on day mate.

    As we said relatively recently, when things return to normality and travel restrictions are lifted Seimi and I plan to meet up in Liverpool and you said you’d come along. Colm said he’d travel up from his southern softness and IIRC Noel said he’d try to make it.

    I’m still 100% on for it.

  83. Yes, I would still hope to be able to make it. I wonder if Pete could be persuaded to venture out of ‘Essex Man’ land – driving up in his white van, learing out the side window and hollering at all the scouse birds in his ‘mockney’ accent as he enters the city.

    Not that I want to stereotype him or anything 🙂

  84. Paul.

    I’d definitely be up for it mate.

    Colm.

    I thought Pete was more Hampshire than Essex.
    I’ll be happy to meet up with Pete next time I’m down south. I’m not sure he would be though.
    You’re in London aren’t you Colm?

  85. I am in London yeah, I’m sure Pete lives in Essex, but even if he is Hampshire, he’ll always be an Essex man to me 🙂

  86. Pete is in Wessex, not Essex

  87. I lived in London for a short while, but it’s ages since I’ve been down to London.
    It’s a great City. Have you not been stabbed yet mate? 😋

  88. Wessex as a location is a bit out of date Phantom.

  89. “Wessex as a location is a bit out of date Phantom.”

    So’s Pete.

  90. LOL. That’s true Seamus.
    I think I’ve heard Pete call it Wessex so I can understand Phantom’s confusion.

  91. http://www.atangledweb.org/?p=74269#comments

  92. Pete likes using olde English names like Wessex. He sees himself as a sort of King Canute figure, trying to hold back the waves of modernism and progress 🙂