Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter Waller

The six page limit, baaaaaa, the CA continued!

Recommended Posts

Like I'm going to tell you (or anyone) where "my" 30lber lives! but trust me, it's coming out this year (even if I have to resort to treble hooks!!!)

Regards

Dave Olley


Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be.

 

 

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity

 

 

 

http://www.safetypublishing.co.uk/
http://www.safetypublishing.ie/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....if you need to resort to treble hooks Dave, then the best may be found at http://www.dlst.co.uk :D

 

No fish were hurt in the making of this advertisement, however some may be as a result :D

 

[ 27. March 2005, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: argyll ]


'I've got a mind like a steel wassitsname'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just read Argyll's transcript of Lord Deedes' piece from the Daily Telegraph.

 

In isolation, Deedes's piece has a point. Before taking that letter as lawless logic, however, I'd look at some of Deedes other writings, then decide. You may not wish to agree quite so readily with him then.

 

Deedes's friend and near neighbour, Alan Clark MP lived at Saltwood Castle very close to the canal Deedes was writing about. In fact, Clark bought Saltwood Castle from Deedes. Alan Clark was a well known anti - a consistent opponent of field sports. Unlikely that two diametrically oppposed points of view would sustain a friendship when such a fundamental difference exists wouldnt you think?

 

If you want confirmation, read Clark's diaries.


This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan, "lawless logic" ?

Anyway, why can't friends have completely opposite opinions on certain matters ?

I have many good friends that hold completely differing views to me, on many issues.

We respect each others opinions and our friendships are probably stronger, because of our individuality.


"I gotta go where its warm, I gotta fly to saint somewhere "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cranfield:

Alan, "lawless logic" ?

Anyway, why can't friends have completely opposite opinions on certain matters ?

I have many good friends that hold completely differing views to me, on many issues.

We respect each others opinions and our friendships are probably stronger, because of our individuality.

Sorry, I meant 'flawless' obviously.

I agree with your point, but having read a fair bit of Deedes ponderings, I find it harder to agree with him as he has grown older and more cantankerous. It was due to Deedes and Max Hastings that I gave up on the 'Daily Fascist' - far too right wing for me to handle.

 

As for his relationship with Clark, I agree they may have been friends in spite of their differences. But with Clark's opposition being as fundamental as it was, I think in this case it's unlikely, and that was the only reason I mentioned it.


This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry that you haven't seen the evidence Gerry, its there if you care to look!!

 

So I'll take that as a 'no' then.


'I've got a mind like a steel wassitsname'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to, but with an open mind, open eyes and open ears I have no doubt that you will find the evidence that you demand.

 

For a start Angling Times did a survey recently !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Argyll, you are indeed a master of the tactic of ignoring facts which undermine your argument.

 

For example... you accused the BBC or paying Fearon because he was a crook. When it was pointed out that he wasn't being paid for being a crook you let the subject go.

 

You want the evidence?

I thought not. Never mind, try this - it's a copy and paste of the relevant post:

" Originally posted by argyll:

'Giving any crook a reward for simply being a crook, is simply offensive''

 

Where's the selectiveness in that. No sorry, still no prize.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

He wasn't being rewarded for being a crook - he was being rewarded for giving his version of events. "

 

Your comment about 'taking that as a "No then" ', has a whiff of conceding defeat whilst trying to retain some vestige of dignity?


This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...