|
|
 |
| found 10 articles for 0.301 sec |
  |
Group: scot.politics · Group Profile · Search for Pedoism in scot.politics
Author: Boedicia
Date: May 2, 2007 17:40
On May 1, 8:15 am, King Amdo <King_A...@hotmail.com> wrote: On Apr 25, 6:22 pm, Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> wrote: In uk.politics.electoral on Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Robert Peffers. <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote : Maybe, but they'd be in a weak negotiating position then. Who would they need to negotiate with? Westminster would be ditched and the
|
| Show full article (3.65Kb) |
Group: uk.politics.misc · Group Profile · Search for Pedoism in uk.politics.misc
Author: Boedicia
Date: May 2, 2007 17:40
On 1 May 2007 08:15:35 -0700, King Amdo <King_Amdo@hotmail.com> wrote: On Apr 25, 6:22 pm, Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> wrote: In uk.politics.electoral on Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Robert Peffers. <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote : Maybe, but they'd be in a weak negotiating position then. Who would they need to negotiate with? Westminster would be ditched and the
|
| Show full article (3.65Kb) |
Group: scot.politics · Group Profile · Search for Pedoism in scot.politics
Author: Charles Ellson
Date: May 1, 2007 13:19
On Apr 25, 6:22 pm, Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> wrote: In uk.politics.electoral on Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Robert Peffers. <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote : Maybe, but they'd be in a weak negotiating position then. Who would they need to negotiate with? Westminster would be ditched and the European and other international courts would be the ones to sort it out Westminster
|
| Show full article (3.62Kb) |
|
 |
|
|