Yeh I read it and its very interesting I had no idea there were limits, I thought they were just something granny brought the gran kids.Did you read the premium bond thread?
Want to comment about that too? Or it's typical just 1 way nonsense?

Yeh I read it and its very interesting I had no idea there were limits, I thought they were just something granny brought the gran kids.Did you read the premium bond thread?
Want to comment about that too? Or it's typical just 1 way nonsense?
Old man was in the Navy. NA convoys. Uncle blown up in Lancaster. Son did time in the infantry. I steered well clear. I thought a punch up in the pub car park was a bit risky.Have you read about the wartime convoys yet?

The context was unequivocally the Merchant Navy in WWII. But it suits your dishonest narrative to pretend otherwise.This is the modern "Merchant Navy". There is nothing disgusting about civilians qualified to work at sea in a commercial capacity.
Nobody is questioning the role of people during World wars. But it suits your dishonest narrative to pretend otherwise.
The whole façade was a lie as well as the medals and high ranking officer impersonation. He lied to people about why he was there and who he was. It's not the first remembrance day he's attended in that capacity either.If someone wears a uniform to which they are not entitled, they are intrinsically lying, by deception.
I'm not fussed about his intentions. I find the whole military pretence thing is abhorrently disrespectful to those true patriots that have served.In no way can it be argued that he believed he had the right to wear that uniform. Therefore he had full intention to deceive.
It is immaterial whether he actually gained any pecuniary advantage from his deception or not.

Ok Himmy02He wasn't. I'm the original, the only one.
Patriotism.I'm not fussed about his intentions. I find the whole military pretence thing is abhorrently disrespectful to those true patriots that have served.
Ok Himmy02
You know anything about a tenna

Which I didn’t. No matter how hard you pretend.The context was unequivocally the Merchant Navy in WWII. But it suits your dishonest narrative to pretend otherwise.
And I said nothing about it being disgusting for civilians to work at sea in a commercial capacity. But it suits your dishonest narrative to pretend otherwise.
What I said was disgusting was the way you characterised the Merchant Navy in the context of WWII.
NoI don't see the humour in these posts. Could you explain it to me, please?

Just banter I guess ?Ok Himmy02
You know anything about a tenna

Of courseJust banter I guess ?

ReportedHello Pete01.
I do actually. Being a numismatist, I know a fair amount about the tenner. I possibly have a couple of thousand pounds worth of them, in denomination value. I'd have to value them individually to estimate their actual worth.
First reintroduced in 1964, I believe. This was the first time a British Monarch was depicted on the banknotes. Previously it had always been Britannia.
The current one, series G, was first issued in 2017, with Jane Austen on the reverse. It was of course a polymer note.
She wasn't the first woman to appear on a banknote. Florence Nightingale was the second woman to appear on a banknote.