Uncool Britannia
in [Classic Cars]
|
Prev: Anti-freeze
Next: I do like central London...
From: Steve Firth on 15 Jun 2010 17:29 Jerry <mapson.scarts(a)btinternet.INVALID> wrote: > I asked you if the car had been subject to a PDI No you didn't you're telling lies, again. Here's a clue, bozo. THe post you keep referring to does not contain a sentence asking me "if the car had been subject to a PDI" it contains "PDI..." on a line by itself. That is not a question. It is not the question that you claimed that you asked. It isn't even a statement. Nor did I respond as you claimed: "I asked you if the car had been PDI checked, you said No, " That's two lies from you. You did not ask if the car had been PDI checked. I did not reply "No". I pointed out to you that no PDI involves stripping down the carburettor. But you keep snipping these responses because they show your lies up for the lies that they are.
From: Steve Firth on 15 Jun 2010 18:40 Jerry <mapson.scarts(a)btinternet.INVALID> wrote: > So how come you answered it as a question?!... I didn't you're telling lies, again.
From: Steve Firth on 16 Jun 2010 01:37 Jerry <mapson.scarts(a)btinternet.INVALID> wrote: > "Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1jk5j3e.1d3oslf59xfe3N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk... > : Jerry <mapson.scarts(a)btinternet.INVALID> wrote: > : > : > So how come you answered it as a question?!... > : > : I didn't you're telling lies, again. > > Yes you did, as anyone and everyone can read for themselves; > Message-ID: <1jjzr1p.4cf23t1xx021rN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk> No, you're still telling lies and since all you can do is to tell lies and to issue abuse there's no point responding to your lies again. The art of troling is to make someone else look stupid, you're an expert at making yourself look stupid so you don't even make the grade as a troll. Claiming that a post says something that it does not has to be the stupidest trick even you have pulled. Or perhaps you're just unable to read English?
From: Adrian on 16 Jun 2010 02:12 stephen.hull(a)btinternet.com gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > The vehicles received 32 coats of paint so perhaps it was not important > to sustain minor damage or have paint imperfections during the build. Or, just p'raps, production efficiency wasn't exactly top of Rolls- Royce's agenda?
From: Indy Jess John on 16 Jun 2010 04:07
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: > Any one hear 'Uncool Britannia' this morning at 10.30 on R4? All about the > Montego and Maestro, etc. Typical journalistic knocking so rather one > sided but worth a listen. > I have just got round to listening to this on iplayer. Interestingly, in the early 1990s I worked with someone who commuted 40 miles each way in a 1300 Maestro. As he said at the time, it was dirt cheap when he bought it second hand, because nobody wanted them, but it had been well looked after. He gave me a lift on a couple of occasions. The 1300 was undergeared for the motorway - 65 tops or else the engine noise overcame conversation. But it was reliable - I can't remember any occasion when it let him down. Jim |