MilitaryForums.co.uk

NsId wrote:Isn´t finish yet, i have something to say and then you can do what you want.

Your photo is from a photoshop, my photograph is from the official webs pages of UK.

Veritas Vincit

So's this one pillock and it's from today's Royal Navy site, which as you say yourself - must be true.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/1469.html

Go kiss my arse you fecking dago.

GD wrote:

NsId wrote:Isn´t finish yet, i have something to say and then you can do what you want.

Your photo is from a photoshop, my photograph is from the official webs pages of UK.

Veritas Vincit

So's this one pillock and it's from today's Royal Navy site, which as you say yourself - must be true.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/1469.html

Go kiss my arse you fecking dago.

OOOhhh this the british cavalry?

---


The same web page say this:

"HMS Ark Royal is larger than her 2 sisters, Invincible and Illustrious, at 210 metres (683 feet) long. She has a maximum beam of 36 metres (117 feet) and a displacement of 20,000 tonnes."

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/1891.html


So, the photo i put here is 100% real, and it shows Illustrious with Ark Royal and not Invincible because it was sunk.

Now good bye i think.

How do you know I'm cavalry? Unless you're really a wind-up merchant who is speakin a the falsa dago lingo and knows British Army cap badges?? Especially cap badges that weren't in the dago attempt to rename the Falkland Islands the Moldovas.

You said it yourself pal. The Navy website can't be wrong. I've shown you the picture of R05 taken recently. I've seen her at Rosyth myself, and Ark Royal.

You claim to be asking for the truth but you don't accept the word of people who've actually been on the ship since 1982??

No pal, you're either a windup merchant or your head's up your own arse. You'll be back because you can't resist taking your argument a wee bit further. Be my guest, I love taking the piss out of idiots.

A definate wind -up merchant!!!
Bring it on!!!!!

I hope so.

NsId wrote:Now good bye i think.

I love the way you believe what you want to yet disregard what you don't. If you have nothing new to say then don't, that way, you save time and we don't get bored reading your crap!

Let's wait and see - he says he's said his piece and he won't be back.

He will - because he's a windup merchant!!

It was only the other day that I drove past the invince. But now you're telling me she sank in 1982? Jezuz. I knew standards were slipping in the RN, but have they really sunk so far that we can actually lose a 21000 ton aircraft carrier and all 800 of her ships company have absolutely no memory of this???

Hehe

PM... it is possible he is right if you read his post!
We had 2 ships almost identical. THe govt covered up the deaths of all those who died. Paid money to keep them quiet. Nobody had any documentary evidence and the fact that the numpty can stop time, move a ship from the UK to mid SA ina few seconds with a new crew and aircraft and nobody notice!

You have just entered the twighlight x-file bermuda triangle zone

do do do do de do

That was defo out of tune Stix!
Back to Bandie school for you!