Angry splutter. I'm not bigoted. I just hate Tory MPs. And someone is judging Essex by it's TV image.
I've spent time in Essex, also Essex elected Mark Francois.
Oddly there were at one time a couple of Lib County Councillors in what is now Mark Francois constituency. But I must admit that having him, Priti Patel and Bernard Jenkin as MP's is not a good advertisement. It is in fact a good reason for changing from FPTP, although not necessarily to AV.
Essex keeps moving Right, the same way Merseyside keeps moving Left.
I know. It can be depressing. And although I've spent much of my life here, i'm not entirely sure why.
Angry splutter. I'm not bigoted. I just hate Tory MPs. And someone is judging Essex by it's TV image.
I've spent time in Essex, also Essex elected Mark Francois.
.
Essex keeps moving Right, the same way Merseyside keeps moving Left.
I know. It can be depressing. And although I've spent much of my life here, i'm not entirely sure why.
Look at old election results, and Labour was competitive across Essex, Suffolk, and Norfolk.
Was watching the 64 election a while back. They said the election would turn on the East Anglian marginals...how times change.
Massive demographic change in rural Norfolk over the intervening decades. The Agicultural Workers Union made Labour competitive in rural seats until the early 1970s. Kings Lynn was a key marginal - as was Yarmouth. On the other hand, the Tories are now weaker in Norwich City . . Lowestoft remained Tory in 1964 against the national swing due to a strong personal vote for Jim Prior - though Waveney was Labour-held 1997 - 2010.
The question whether MPs should subject themselves to by-elections is a good one. It seems to me that MPs who can fairly claim that events have taken their party away from them rather than vice versa don’t have the same obligation as MPs who have moved away from their party.
So the current ex-Cons have more explaining for me on this than the ex-Labs.
If Theresa May embraces no-deal, future Con defectors have no moral obligation to submit themselves to a fresh verdict of their constituency electorate.
Hasn't she rather embraced No Deal already? That's what we're heading for, she has refused to take it off the table, her Deal has been heavily defeated and the EU has repeatedly said that the WA is not up for renegotiation.
Though Allen, Soubry, and Wollaston have sought to force a choice between No Deal and No Brexit. They have compromised over nothing. They can't complain that No Deal is now an option.
I suppose they have built a firewall around themselves if No Deal Brexit happens. I don't think it is in their gift to change the outcome of Brexit as they number too few at the moment.
On strategy it will be interesting to see the next move from ERG + DUP!
Chris Gayle could do with laying off the red stripes....I’ve seen darts players move faster to retrieve their darts tha Gayle chasing the ball in the field.
The question whether MPs should subject themselves to by-elections is a good one. It seems to me that MPs who can fairly claim that events have taken their party away from them rather than vice versa don’t have the same obligation as MPs who have moved away from their party.
So the current ex-Cons have more explaining for me on this than the ex-Labs.
If Theresa May embraces no-deal, future Con defectors have no moral obligation to submit themselves to a fresh verdict of their constituency electorate.
Hasn't she rather embraced No Deal already? That's what we're heading for, she has refused to take it off the table, her Deal has been heavily defeated and the EU has repeatedly said that the WA is not up for renegotiation.
Though Allen, Soubry, and Wollaston have sought to force a choice between No Deal and No Brexit. They have compromised over nothing. They can't complain that No Deal is now an option.
I suppose they have built a firewall around themselves if No Deal Brexit happens. I don't think it is in their gift to change the outcome of Brexit as they number too few at the moment. On strategy it will be interesting to see the next move from ERG + DUP!
Probably dig in their heels even further - after all, May needs their votes even more now, and they have the potential to take far more MPs with them if they were to flounce out. No deal remains very much the favourite, since the fact May cannot give them anything they might accept has not changed. Only the EU suddenly capitulating on something can make it not the favourite, and that'd be optimistic to expect.
Following on from recent events, I watched the first episode of G.B.H. this evening (for the first time since it was originally broadcast). I know it is a drama - but it is based in the reality of Labour politics of the 1980s. The thugs depicted on top of the school buildings are the 80s equivalent of the current mob of online haters - the parallels of left wing intimidation of the past to what is seen today is quite striking (!) and scary at the same time.
Hatton may have been suspended - but his fellow travellers are running the show. And that is a lesson people should not be allowed to forget.
Jeremy and the hard left have their betrayal narrative. An excuse for defeat that will sustain the myths.
Of course, we'd all much rather they were screaming betrayal in a few years than blaming the rolling blackouts, 1,000,000% inflation rate and national bog roll shortage on the Americans, whilst their still-foetuses-in-the-womb future successors were already preparing to say "But it wasn't REAL socialism!"
Chris Gayle could do with laying off the red stripes....I’ve seen darts players move faster to retrieve their darts tha Gayle chasing the ball in the field.
So far they're not a patch on England, are they. Fielding-wise.
The question whether MPs should subject themselves to by-elections is a good one. It seems to me that MPs who can fairly claim that events have taken their party away from them rather than vice versa don’t have the same obligation as MPs who have moved away from their party.
So the current ex-Cons have more explaining for me on this than the ex-Labs.
If Theresa May embraces no-deal, future Con defectors have no moral obligation to submit themselves to a fresh verdict of their constituency electorate.
Hasn't she rather embraced No Deal already? That's what we're heading for, she has refused to take it off the table, her Deal has been heavily defeated and the EU has repeatedly said that the WA is not up for renegotiation.
Though Allen, Soubry, and Wollaston have sought to force a choice between No Deal and No Brexit. They have compromised over nothing. They can't complain that No Deal is now an option.
That’s not true. Soubra consistently pushed for a single market plus customs union Brexit until fairly recently.
She's voted against the government at every opportunity.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The question whether MPs should subject themselves to by-elections is a good one. It seems to me that MPs who can fairly claim that events have taken their party away from them rather than vice versa don’t have the same obligation as MPs who have moved away from their party.
So the current ex-Cons have more explaining for me on this than the ex-Labs.
If Theresa May embraces no-deal, future Con defectors have no moral obligation to submit themselves to a fresh verdict of their constituency electorate.
Hasn't she rather embraced No Deal already? That's what we're heading for, she has refused to take it off the table, her Deal has been heavily defeated and the EU has repeatedly said that the WA is not up for renegotiation.
Though Allen, Soubry, and Wollaston have sought to force a choice between No Deal and No Brexit. They have compromised over nothing. They can't complain that No Deal is now an option.
That’s not true. Soubra consistently pushed for a single market plus customs union Brexit until fairly recently.
She's voted against the government at every opportunity.
And how many opportunities has the government given ?
This mess is about May’s stubbornness and procrastination.
The question whether MPs should subject themselves to by-elections is a good one. It seems to me that MPs who can fairly claim that events have taken their party away from them rather than vice versa don’t have the same obligation as MPs who have moved away from their party.
So the current ex-Cons have more explaining for me on this than the ex-Labs.
If Theresa May embraces no-deal, future Con defectors have no moral obligation to submit themselves to a fresh verdict of their constituency electorate.
Hasn't she rather embraced No Deal already? That's what we're heading for, she has refused to take it off the table, her Deal has been heavily defeated and the EU has repeatedly said that the WA is not up for renegotiation.
Though Allen, Soubry, and Wollaston have sought to force a choice between No Deal and No Brexit. They have compromised over nothing. They can't complain that No Deal is now an option.
I suppose they have built a firewall around themselves if No Deal Brexit happens. I don't think it is in their gift to change the outcome of Brexit as they number too few at the moment. On strategy it will be interesting to see the next move from ERG + DUP!
Probably dig in their heels even further - after all, May needs their votes even more now, and they have the potential to take far more MPs with them if they were to flounce out. No deal remains very much the favourite, since the fact May cannot give them anything they might accept has not changed. Only the EU suddenly capitulating on something can make it not the favourite, and that'd be optimistic to expect.
I suspect you are probably correct about No Deal. The ERG seem to have adopted the DUP strategy on getting their own way.
I wonder how much they organise and plan strategy together? They must collude pretty deeply together on a lot of issues and especially No Deal Brexit.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
If what John Mann said was true he would have said it (or be happy to repeat it) without the protections the common offers.
I don't think anyone is naive enough to believe John isn't a coward and would repeat his lies without that protection.
You know for a fact they're lies, do you? Have you seen the correspondence he received? And the correspondence he had with the police?
I know what John's like, he is a snivelling little coward.
When do you expect him to repeat what he said without protection?
He won't because it is lies, that is the evidence I have, I wait to be proved wrong.
So you have no evidence. Good to get that cleared up.
For the sake of OGH's wallet, best not to keep repeating your allegation, which is potentially libellous.
So when pray tell do you expect brave John to repeat his words without protection?
Surely he would be happy to do so were he not making up a pack of lies, it is the only logical conclusion that the coward lacks the bravery to repeat his lies without protection.
Stop it. You are putting OGH at risk.
(And making yourself look ridiculous.)
So when do you expect the snivelling little coward to repeat himself without protection?
Not sure why you don't have an answer, surely brave John will do so any second?
Modern ODI really is something else. England have cruises to 200 off 26 overs. At that kind of clip if they had to get 450 it wouldn’t be impossible.
The old rule of thumb used to be (don't know if it still is) that par is getting 50% of the target by the 30th over. Get the remaining 50% in final 20 overs.
John Mann attacking Kevin Macquire in the HOC on anti semitism, and I am not going to repeat his allegation
Go on! What's Kev been up to now?
I think he's from Hartlepool
I do not have the protection of the HOC so I would suggest you watch it on playback
We could always wait for John to repeat it outside the of the commons.
As we know what an honest and reliable source John is there would be no reason for him to have any fear about saying it without any protections on his speech.
I know some of you are thinking John is some kind of coward who would smear someone by telling what he knows to be lies merely for his own political advancement but I think much more highly of him than that.
John would only be saying these things if they were true, stake my life on it....
If what John Mann said is true and he has the evidence, then it would be him who would have a good case for libel against the journalist in question.
Still, good to see that Labour is still in shooting-the-messenger mode. That listening exercise of Mr McDonnell seems to have been very short-lived.
If what John Mann said was true he would have said it (or be happy to repeat it) without the protections the common offers.
I don't think anyone is naive enough to believe John isn't a coward and would repeat his lies without that protection.
You know for a fact they're lies, do you? Have you seen the correspondence he received? And the correspondence he had with the police?
I know what John's like, he is a snivelling little coward.
When do you expect him to repeat what he said without protection?
He won't because it is lies, that is the evidence I have, I wait to be proved wrong.
As a matter of interest have you listened to his comments
Yes, bullies often like to attack people if they don't think there is a consequence.
Do you expect John Mann to repeat his accusations outside the commons or do you think he is too cowardly to do so?
I think wise council is for you to let this go, as said by other posters
Let me guess you think John won't repeat his accusations without protection but want to stick up for John because he attacks Corbyn. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Glad to see The Jezziah showing his support for Jezbollah's Kinder, Gentler Politics by acting like a petulant teenager screeching on about snivelling cowards
Following on from recent events, I watched the first episode of G.B.H. this evening (for the first time since it was originally broadcast). I know it is a drama - but it is based in the reality of Labour politics of the 1980s. The thugs depicted on top of the school buildings are the 80s equivalent of the current mob of online haters - the parallels of left wing intimidation of the past to what is seen today is quite striking (!) and scary at the same time.
Hatton may have been suspended - but his fellow travellers are running the show. And that is a lesson people should not be allowed to forget.
Absolutely. I've been recommending GBH on here and on Twitter for months. The parallels are really striking.
...though if you take them literally, the later episodes raise all sorts of questions given that Corbyn could be said, like Michael Murray, to be an easily dupable "useful idiot"...
10 points for spotting a young Anna Friel and another 10 points for the narrator of Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends.
John Mann attacking Kevin Macquire in the HOC on anti semitism, and I am not going to repeat his allegation
Go on! What's Kev been up to now?
I think he's from Hartlepool
I do not have the protection of the HOC so I would suggest you watch it on playback
We could always wait for John to repeat it outside the of
I know some of you are thinking John is some kind of coward who would smear someone by telling what he knows to be lies merely for his own political advancement but I think much more highly of him than that.
John would only be saying these things if they were true, stake my life on it....
If what John Mann said is true and he has the evidence, then it would be him who would have a good case for libel against the journalist in question.
Still, good to see that Labour is still in shooting-the-messenger mode. That listening exercise of Mr McDonnell seems to have been very short-lived.
If what John Mann said was true he would have said it (or be happy to repeat it) without the protections the common offers.
I don't think anyone is naive enough to believe John isn't a coward and would repeat his lies without that protection.
You know for a fact they're lies, do you? Have you seen the correspondence he received? And the correspondence he had with the police?
I know what John's like, he is a snivelling little coward.
When do you expect him to repeat what he said without protection?
He won't because it is lies, that is the evidence I have, I wait to be proved wrong.
As a matter of interest have you listened to his comments
Yes, bullies often like to attack people if they don't think there is a consequence.
Do you expect John Mann to repeat his accusations outside the commons or do you think he is too cowardly to do so?
I think wise council is for you to let this go, as said by other posters
Let me guess you think John won't repeat his accusations without protection but want to stick up for John because he attacks Corbyn. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Try pressing the pause button at the bottom of the video and then pressing play again. That's what I had to do to get it to wake up.
Yes, bullies often like to attack people if they don't think there is a consequence.
Do you expect John Mann to repeat his accusations outside the commons or do you think he is too cowardly to do so?
I think wise council is for you to let this go, as said by other posters
Let me guess you think John won't repeat his accusations without protection but want to stick up for John because he attacks Corbyn. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Have you listened to his comments
I have been polite and already answered your question, I will do so again. Yes I have.
I expect you will now be polite and answer my question.
Do you expect John to repeat his accusations somewhere he can't make untrue accusations without consequence (like outside the commons)?
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Slide the bar to 18.28
As I say, that’s Scottish questions, no sign of John Mann.
Did you not see the response from Tory HQ saying that they had already turned him down?
Whilst former kipper far less impressive than Wolfe and way more swivel eyed, but without any media profile comes into and shapes the Conservative party? 🤔
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
The link works. Scroll down through the time-stamped contributions on the right-hand side of the page until you get to "18:28:22 John Mann MP (Bassetlaw, Labour)"
No it doesn't. I click on the time stamp and nothing happens. It's very frustrating.
Slide the bar to 18.28
As I say, that’s Scottish questions, no sign of John Mann.
Yes, bullies often like to attack people if they don't think there is a consequence.
Do you expect John Mann to repeat his accusations outside the commons or do you think he is too cowardly to do so?
I think wise council is for you to let this go, as said by other posters
Let me guess you think John won't repeat his accusations without protection but want to stick up for John because he attacks Corbyn. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Have you listened to his comments
I have been polite and already answered your question, I will do so again. Yes I have.
I expect you will now be polite and answer my question.
Do you expect John to repeat his accusations somewhere he can't make untrue accusations without consequence (like outside the commons)?
I have not heard John Mann's allegations but given it is possible to hear them and read them in reports of proceedings could they without a problem be repeated on an Internet forum just as for example the Philip Green story was?
Anyone have a link for John Mann’s comments? I checked out the tape someone posted up thread but the time stamp only led to some very mundane Scottish debate.
I must admit that I'm slightly concerned about the distinction between:
1. is a citizen of another country 2. is eligible to the citizen of another country
Because if 2 is the barrier, then the Home Secretary can - without going through any legal process - strip anybody of Jewsish heritage, or who was born in Northern Ireland, or who has one Irish grandparent of their citizenship.
There is also the “seriously prejudicial” criteria!
I must admit that I'm slightly concerned about the distinction between:
1. is a citizen of another country 2. is eligible to the citizen of another country
Because if 2 is the barrier, then the Home Secretary can - without going through any legal process - strip anybody of Jewsish heritage, or who was born in Northern Ireland, or who has one Irish grandparent of their citizenship.
There is also the “seriously prejudicial” criteria!
So if, say, one of David Camerons parents had duel nationality, and we were operating a policy of stripping British citizenship from those showing evidence of causing chaos, disorder, threatening the way of life we have in this country... there could only be one outcome?
So Labour MP made statements laying themselves wide open to ridicule today.
One is an insignificant backbench MP at odds with the party, whom everyone sane thinks is a racist coward, liar and failure.
the MP for Bassetlaw.
*grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
FTFY
You really do give credence to the idea that Labour has become a quasi religious cult.
Yes my lack of support for John Mann certainly marks me out as extreme...
Rather, your adopted acolyte persona.
So do you think Mann will be repeating his accusations?
Nobody answers me because nobody does, the little coward did that because he knows it offers him protection to make up whatever rubbish he wants without consequence.
If pointing this out makes me an acolyte then so be it, but he is acting like a cheap bully and should be called out for it, I won't be deterred from doing so by insults.
Fitch May be cutting the UK’s credit rating from AA
Remember when everyone was obsessed about the UK's AAA rating?
Those were the days...
I remember when you could get $2 or €1.5 for £1.
Before Lawsons mid 80s economic miracle it was $4 for £1
Um, no it wasn't. It was pegged to £1=$4.03 in 1940, then devalued to £1=$2.8 in 1949, then devalued to £1=$2.4 in 1967, then free-floated in 1971, then it had an arse of a time in Thatcher 1, ranging from $2.4 to $1.03, then around the end of the eighties/beginning of the 90's it began to stabilise, then had a wobble during the ERM fallout, then strengthened to $2.10 in 2007 at the peak of the boom, then fell to around $1.4 post-crisis, then began to strengthen again, around $1.6 around the 2015 elex, then fell to around $1.4 as the referendum campaign proceeded, then strengthened to $1.5 when the markets thought it would Remain, then fell to $1.35 overnight, then fell again when May talked to the 2016(?) conference and the markets realised the implications, then fell briefly to $1.2, then rose to just over $1.4 when the markets thought we had a deal, then fell again when they realised we might not. Some projections have us hitting $1.15 if we leave no-deal.
So Labour MP made statements laying themselves wide open to ridicule today.
One is an insignificant backbench MP at odds with the party, whom everyone sane thinks is a racist coward, liar and failure.
the MP for Bassetlaw.
*grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
FTFY
You really do give credence to the idea that Labour has become a quasi religious cult.
Yes my lack of support for John Mann certainly marks me out as extreme...
Rather, your adopted acolyte persona.
So do you think Mann will be repeating his accusations?
Nobody answers me because nobody does, the little coward did that because he knows it offers him protection to make up whatever rubbish he wants without consequence.
If pointing this out makes me an acolyte then so be it, but he is acting like a cheap bully and should be called out for it, I won't be deterred from doing so by insults.
You are repeatedly making potentially libellous accusations against an MP on someone else’s site thereby putting the owner of this site at legal risk.
Try and take some advice. Stop it. Mr Smithson allows people to post on this site but understandably expects posters not to behave in a way which could get him in trouble with lawyers.
If you want to pursue whatever issues you have with Mr Mann do it on your own site.
So Labour MP made statements laying themselves wide open to ridicule today.
One is an insignificant backbench MP at odds with the party, whom everyone sane thinks is a racist coward, liar and failure.
the MP for Bassetlaw.
*grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
FTFY
You really do give credence to the idea that Labour has become a quasi religious cult.
Yes my lack of support for John Mann certainly marks me out as extreme...
Rather, your adopted acolyte persona.
So do you think Mann will be repeating his accusations?
Nobody answers me because nobody does, the little coward did that because he knows it offers him protection to make up whatever rubbish he wants without consequence.
If pointing this out makes me an acolyte then so be it, but he is acting like a cheap bully and should be called out for it, I won't be deterred from doing so by insults.
You are repeatedly making potentially libellous accusations against an MP on someone else’s site thereby putting the owner of this site at legal risk.
Try and take some advice. Stop it. Mr Smithson allows people to post on this site but understandably expects posters not to behave in a way which could get him in trouble with lawyers.
If you want to pursue whatever issues you have with Mr Mann do it on your own site.
TBH if you are naive enough to believe John will repeat his accusations without the protection of being an MP in the commons then good for you.
Willing to offer any time frame on that?
My guess is the coward won't do it at all, he'll hide behind his ability to make accusations without consequence.
Comments
On strategy it will be interesting to see the next move from ERG + DUP!
Hatton may have been suspended - but his fellow travellers are running the show. And that is a lesson people should not be allowed to forget.
One can but pray.
This mess is about May’s stubbornness and procrastination.
I wonder how much they organise and plan strategy together? They must collude pretty deeply together on a lot of issues and especially No Deal Brexit.
https://www.boots.com/boots-classic-reading-glasses-style-3-10198547
At 18.24
ITV twisted your policy on early evening bulletin on basis you and experts had a plan in place you shredded after a weeks trail by media.
Not sure why you don't have an answer, surely brave John will do so any second?
We've gotten well over half by the 25th over.
Just watch them collapse like a House of Cards now...
...though if you take them literally, the later episodes raise all sorts of questions given that Corbyn could be said, like Michael Murray, to be an easily dupable "useful idiot"...
10 points for spotting a young Anna Friel and another 10 points for the narrator of Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends.
Those were the days...
I expect you will now be polite and answer my question.
Do you expect John to repeat his accusations somewhere he can't make untrue accusations without consequence (like outside the commons)?
Whilst former kipper far less impressive than Wolfe and way more swivel eyed, but without any media profile comes into and shapes the Conservative party? 🤔
Honestly, these Corbynistas.
NEW THREAD
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-02-20/debates/993F895E-D215-4773-A464-1A6320523B0E/AntisemitismInModernSociety#contribution-3697F29B-93EA-4016-AE6B-C40017640901
Nobody answers me because nobody does, the little coward did that because he knows it offers him protection to make up whatever rubbish he wants without consequence.
If pointing this out makes me an acolyte then so be it, but he is acting like a cheap bully and should be called out for it, I won't be deterred from doing so by insults.
Try and take some advice. Stop it. Mr Smithson allows people to post on this site but understandably expects posters not to behave in a way which could get him in trouble with lawyers.
If you want to pursue whatever issues you have with Mr Mann do it on your own site.
Willing to offer any time frame on that?
My guess is the coward won't do it at all, he'll hide behind his ability to make accusations without consequence.
testing testing.. I really have spilt coffee all over my keyboard…..