Perfidious Albion

I see the British Home Office is fighting tooth and nail to keep the Gurkhas out of Britain, seems absolutely disgraceful that after fighting for Britain for years, they won’t even let you into the country.

Other servants of the crown (who I’d have less sypmathy for!) those supergrasses they recruited in the North in the 70s were hung out to dry aswell, Raymond Guillmore is a wreck and they stopped offering him psychiatric services. Stopped his money after three years. A poor reward for looking over your back for the rest of your life and your entire family despising you…

They are reaping now what they have sown in the past.

Insert Nelson Muntzs’ standard reply here.

Poor Raymond Gilmour, my heart bleeds…

I read that article in The Tribune the other day about Gilmour and McGartland. Nationalists sell outs who now consider themselves British, vote Conservative, wear poppies and all that lark. Still trying to convince themselves that they took the shilling for ideological reasons and due to being despised by IRA actions rather than facing up to the fact they were money-hungry cunts.

They took the shilling and no mistake, no other reason for them turning. See themselves as heroes now, looking for army pensions and the lot. Petty criminals who served their purpose for the crown and were disposed of soon after. They were paid well enough.

Gurkhas are a different story though, they served honestly in the forces and surely to fcuk the Brits would leave the small few of them into the country if that’s what they want. They are really making themselves out to be total kunts by not letting them have citzenship.

LONDON (Reuters) - Former Gurkha soldiers cheered and waved their regiment’s flag outside the High Court in London on Tuesday after they won a long-running fight to secure the right to retire in Britain.

Members of the famous unit, which has fought for Britain since 1815, most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan, overturned an earlier ruling that meant those who retired before 1997 had no automatic right to live in Britain.

All other foreign soldiers in the British Army can settle in Britain after four years’ service anywhere in the world. About 2,000 Gurkhas are affected by the current rules. High Court judge Mr Justice Blake ruled that instructions given by the Home Office to immigration officials were unlawful and must be changed.

“Today is a wonderful, terrific victory day for the Gurkhas of Nepal,” said lawyer Martin Howe, who represented them. “It is a victory for common sense, it is a victory for fairness.”

Dozens of Gurkhas and their supporters gathered outside court waving the regiment’s green flag, which bears two kukris, a traditional Nepalese curved knife.

They gave three cheers for actress Joanna Lumley, who supported their campaign because her father was a member of the regiment.

“This day is more important than I can tell you,” she said. “It gives our country the chance to right a great wrong and to wipe out a national shame.”

During the hearing, their barrister Edward Fitzgerald said a decision to bar Gurkhas because they were based in Hong Kong until the territory was returned to China in 1997 was unfair.

He rejected government claims that they did not have close links with Britain.

After the ruling, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the rules would be rewritten.

“In light of the court’s ruling we will revise and publish new guidance,” she said. “We will honour our commitment to the Gurkhas by reviewing all cases by the end of the year.” The Ministry of Defence made no comment on the ruling.

Gurkhas were first recruited by colonial rulers in India in the 19th century as a “martial race” known for their bravery

Took an Irish lad to get the Gurkhas their rights, we are still a thorn in the side of perfidious Albion.

Gurkhas: Welcome to Britain.

Joanna Lumley has set you free.

[quote=“SHANNONSIDER**”]Gurkhas: Welcome to Britain.

Joanna Lumley has set you free.[/QUOTE]

Her cunning plan to marry all 8975 Gurkhas in a mass ceremony, thus bestowing spouse visas on all of them has worked a treat.

I hope this isn’t going to be a cue for some moron to include her in the Auld Birds you would shag thread.

I think you will find that she is mentioned in the very first post about auld birds you would shag:)

Armed Forces Toys

I see that HM will next year commision a range of Gurkha action figures to go along with this spiffing range of toys just launched.

Perfidious Albion has been thwarted once more. I have learnt that recent English translations of Jules Verne’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea have reinstated Daniel O’Connell to his rightful place in the picture gallery of the ship’s cabin among the other freedom fighters. British agents had for decades ensured that O’Connell never featured in any English translations of the work lest it give succour to Irish nationalists and their cause.


O’connell was a sectarian unionist -whats it got to do with nationalism

Huh? I feel you’re being quite harsh branding a founding member of the repeal* association as a unionist, TASE.

*of the Act of Union.

he wanted home rule & the union of britain & Ireland to be kept. he was happy to be ruled by the brits

:clap: :clap: :clap:

A typically simplistic analysis. He campaigned for the repeal of the Act of Union ergo he didn’t want union, he wanted a return to ‘Grattan’s Parliament’ which was a measure of self-government, a house that would have been massively enhanced by the recently won Catholic Emancipation, he split with the Young Irelanders over physical force as far as I know, and pissed them off when he offended slave-owning Yanks over slavery. Young Ireland felt he shouldn’t upset the Yanks but he called them out on their shamefulness anyway.

nonsense- he fancied the life of a poitican in dublin- thats why he wanted the parliment-he had no bold agenda other than lining his pocket- every thing he did was in his own interest

conning the people into thinking catholic emancipation was a major issue shows how this self serving cunt worked