Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat Apr 25, 2026 3:58 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
Sussex wrote:
TornCasualty wrote:
So the English weren't defeated at Hastings then :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Nearly as badly as your lot in Argentina. :roll:

Apologies to my Scots friends for those words. :roll: :roll:

Remind me, what were your lot doing that summer?

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57331
Location: 1066 Country
gusmac wrote:
Remind me, what were your lot doing that summer?

I can't quite remember. 8-[

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
Sussex wrote:
gusmac wrote:
Remind me, what were your lot doing that summer?

I can't quite remember. 8-[
:^o

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:51 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: The Internet
TornCasualty wrote:
English - Saxons
French - Normans


Your historical analysis is about as superficial as you view of taxi markets, Mr Torn - no wonder your post was accompanied by so many smilies :lol:

You could have at least said that it was the Anglo Saxons who equated to the English, because of course the term English is derived from Angle.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Oh and for the record, the Normans defeated the Saxons at Hastings in 1066.[/quote]



For the record the Normans did not defeat the Saxons at Hastings. It was at a place now called Battle which is about 6 miles inland from Hastings. The Saxons were very tired having just marched from their succesful battle at Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire. Their plight was not helped by the third army on the battlefield that day who were supposed to be on Harolds side but instead they waited to see who was winning before joining with them.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
grandad wrote:
gusmac wrote:
Oh and for the record, the Normans defeated the Saxons at Hastings in 1066.




For the record the Normans did not defeat the Saxons at Hastings. It was at a place now called Battle which is about 6 miles inland from Hastings. The Saxons were very tired having just marched from their succesful battle at Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire. Their plight was not helped by the third army on the battlefield that day who were supposed to be on Harolds side but instead they waited to see who was winning before joining with them.
Thanks for the info about the location, grandad. I suppose "the Battle of Battle" doesn't have the same ring to it, though I doubt if the location was called Battle until afterwards. I did know about the Battle of Stamford Bridge on September 25 when King Harold Godwineson and his army defeated King Harald Hardrada of Norway and Tostig (brother of King Harold Godwineson). Both were killed during the battle. This was the last Viking invasion of Britain. William the B*stard, or Conqueror as he became known, landed at Hastings 4 days later. King Harold marched his army 240 miles south and the Battle of Hastings, as it became known, occured on 14 October 1066.
The rest is history.

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:51 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: The Internet
Well you know what history's like - it's just one damn thing after another :lol:

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
TDO wrote:
Well you know what history's like - it's just one damn thing after another :lol:
Can't argue with that.

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:12 am
Posts: 590
Location: North Of The Tyne
Ah think iv,e just learned more on this thread than what i ever did at school :lol:

_________________
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z07K29Fc15U


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:45 pm
Posts: 55
Sussex wrote:
TornCasualty wrote:
I thought I did, I asked a one line question and it could have been answered simply with a one line answer.

Now Mr TC we both know that there was more to this than that, and it's nice to see that a site such as fasties puts up a picture of a leading licensing lawyer.

But it is/was a case of fasties adding two and two together and getting hundreds. :lol: :lol: :lol:


One has to wonder what Fastblacks and an enquiry for information have to do with this thread. There is no "Fastblacks Scottish contingent." Many of us in Edinburgh and other areas read Fasties. Most of us in Edinburgh know the guys involved in the Fastblacks site, unlike here where JD, TDO, Alex and Sussex go to extraordinary lengths to hide their identities.
It is a fact that if Jim Button was associated with this site he would most certainly hide any involvement he had, since it would be detrimental to his company and standing if it was thought that he had some connection here.
It is obvious that those involved with this site are too scared to tell us who they are, what they really do or why they do it, for fear of reprisals.
They do not care what effect their campaigns for derestriction have on anyone. They present a totally biased viewpoint. One only has to read through a few threads to see a pattern emerge. If a point is raised which is contrary to the beliefs of TDO, then one by one in come JD, TDO and Sussex in all their aliases, to disagree and make it seem that the initial poster is alone in holding any contrary view.
More and more it becomes apparent that, rather than just present facts and news, TDO creates them on occasion in order to vilify anyone perceived as a threat to their campaign. An opinion expressed by JD for example soon becomes established as "fact" with the support of his alter egos and compatriots.
One day they will be outed and exposed for what they are.
Pity really, since this forum could have been a neutral zone for all ideas to be considered.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
gusmac wrote:
grandad wrote:
gusmac wrote:
Oh and for the record, the Normans defeated the Saxons at Hastings in 1066.




For the record the Normans did not defeat the Saxons at Hastings. It was at a place now called Battle which is about 6 miles inland from Hastings. The Saxons were very tired having just marched from their succesful battle at Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire. Their plight was not helped by the third army on the battlefield that day who were supposed to be on Harolds side but instead they waited to see who was winning before joining with them.
Thanks for the info about the location, grandad. I suppose "the Battle of Battle" doesn't have the same ring to it, though I doubt if the location was called Battle until afterwards. I did know about the Battle of Stamford Bridge on September 25 when King Harold Godwineson and his army defeated King Harald Hardrada of Norway and Tostig (brother of King Harold Godwineson). Both were killed during the battle. This was the last Viking invasion of Britain. William the B*stard, or Conqueror as he became known, landed at Hastings 4 days later. King Harold marched his army 240 miles south and the Battle of Hastings, as it became known, occured on 14 October 1066.
The rest is history.


There is also the story of the recruitment of the army on the way south. Obviously Harold's army were a bit short of men so he sent some of his top soldiers ahead to round up some "volunteers". Upon Harolds arrival close to where the Battle against William the conquerer was to take place, Harold was introduced to his new recruits. He was given a brief resume of each new soldiers assets until he came to a small guy at the end. He asked "And what about this fellow?" to which the reply was "he ain't much good on a horse and he ain't much good with a bow. In fact you want to stay clear of him, he will have someones eye out."

And the rest is history. :wink:

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
:lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57331
Location: 1066 Country
John T wrote:
If a point is raised which is contrary to the beliefs of TDO, then one by one in come JD, TDO and Sussex in all their aliases, to disagree and make it seem that the initial poster is alone in holding any contrary view.

Remind what views the site has. :?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57331
Location: 1066 Country
John T wrote:
It is a fact that if Jim Button was associated with this site he would most certainly hide any involvement he had, since it would be detrimental to his company and standing if it was thought that he had some connection here.

Well why don't you ask him, instead of repeating the lie here?

Here is his e-mail address james@jamesbutton.co.uk .

I would be very interested in the reply you get. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Aberdeen
Sussex wrote:
John T wrote:
It is a fact that if Jim Button was associated with this site he would most certainly hide any involvement he had, since it would be detrimental to his company and standing if it was thought that he had some connection here.

Well why don't you ask him, instead of repeating the lie here?

Here is his e-mail address james@jamesbutton.co.uk .

I would be very interested in the reply you get. :wink:


Now there's a plan.

_________________
Image
http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 717 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group