Is Islam, the new Nazi ?

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 16 of 41 < 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >

matt_himself Matataland 18 Jun 14 11.07pm
Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 11.03pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.52pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.45pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.42pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.30pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.16pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.05pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.00pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 9.46pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 9.24pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 8.00pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 6.19pm You are a champagne socialist as you enjoy the benefits of a capitalist system but appear to abhor it. And if there is one trait I despise in people is duplicity and people being brazen about that. Alas we have to survive in the world in which we exist. Doesn't mean we can't stand against it though. So, what you are saying is that I can 'like' or 'follow' a social revolution in Egypt on Facebook but I am not going to give up my three bedroom house in Chislehurst or my 42in Samsung TV in order to feed the striking families but they will be consoled with my solidarity? Hmm.... I didn't know you lived in Chislehurst. Seriously, you think anyone who has a 'left' ideology has to give up the trappings of modern life? I give a lot of my time to the causes in which I believe in. I give a lot of my time defending and representing others in my union capacities- I'm not financially rewarded for it. It looks like, to those not in the Lefty inner circle, that the comforts of modern life such as a nice house, good furnishings and electrical goods, are available to you but your contribution to the cause is turning up when you are able too (baby sitters permitted) and that solidarity equals a 'like' on Facebook with whatever loony tune cause happens in the World because it lessens your middle class guilt. Let us all hope that the revolution happens on a day when you can all have comprehensive child care. you keep going on about middle class guilt. That's complete s***e. Yes I may have worked my way to middle class, but had a working class upbringing. I've had an insight in what it's like to be poor, and believe me, despite what you think, it aint an easy life. What a response! You ain't nothing but a social contrarian enjoying the easy life but haunted by guilt because of it. That is your problem and not societies but you feel you have to label everyone opposed to you as a 'cund' because of it. Bravo Gusset. The know all, say all, do nothing of Chislehurst. if you say so. Mr play the man not the issue. capitalist cund. Edited by nickgusset (18 Jun 2014 10.31pm) The fact you have given a one liner insult and not addressed the issue speaks volumes to me. Keep reaching for that rainbow and I hope the guilt subsides enough sometime to allow you to enjoy life at some point. To be honest matt. I'm bored of you. Go find someone else to play with please. As you wish to talk the talk, expect to be made to walk the walk. You come across as a plastic socialist and your deliberately controversial threads have been exposed as your vanity. As you continue to post this stuff, expect people to question it and your motives. Should you not be able to handle that, that is your problem. I will continue to question you as and when you post this stuff, I do not swear nor insult you on a base level, but asking me to go away because you can't handle the questioning is pathetic and not allowing free speech on a public message board. you are so right matt. Your erudite postings have been a revelation to me. keep going and I may go and join the local conservatives. i look forward to you hijacking another thread. Pathetic. However, I hear the cry of despair. I will leave you alone on this thread after this post. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 18 Jun 14 11.07pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 11.03pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.52pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.45pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.42pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.30pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.16pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.05pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.00pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 9.46pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 9.24pm

Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 8.00pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 6.19pm

You are a champagne socialist as you enjoy the benefits of a capitalist system but appear to abhor it. And if there is one trait I despise in people is duplicity and people being brazen about that.

Alas we have to survive in the world in which we exist. Doesn't mean we can't stand against it though.

So, what you are saying is that I can 'like' or 'follow' a social revolution in Egypt on Facebook but I am not going to give up my three bedroom house in Chislehurst or my 42in Samsung TV in order to feed the striking families but they will be consoled with my solidarity?

Hmm....

I didn't know you lived in Chislehurst.

Seriously, you think anyone who has a 'left' ideology has to give up the trappings of modern life?

I give a lot of my time to the causes in which I believe in. I give a lot of my time defending and representing others in my union capacities- I'm not financially rewarded for it.

It looks like, to those not in the Lefty inner circle, that the comforts of modern life such as a nice house, good furnishings and electrical goods, are available to you but your contribution to the cause is turning up when you are able too (baby sitters permitted) and that solidarity equals a 'like' on Facebook with whatever loony tune cause happens in the World because it lessens your middle class guilt.

Let us all hope that the revolution happens on a day when you can all have comprehensive child care.

you keep going on about middle class guilt. That's complete s***e. Yes I may have worked my way to middle class, but had a working class upbringing. I've had an insight in what it's like to be poor, and believe me, despite what you think, it aint an easy life.

What a response! You ain't nothing but a social contrarian enjoying the easy life but haunted by guilt because of it.

That is your problem and not societies but you feel you have to label everyone opposed to you as a 'cund' because of it. Bravo Gusset. The know all, say all, do nothing of Chislehurst.

if you say so. Mr play the man not the issue. capitalist cund.

Edited by nickgusset (18 Jun 2014 10.31pm)

The fact you have given a one liner insult and not addressed the issue speaks volumes to me.

Keep reaching for that rainbow and I hope the guilt subsides enough sometime to allow you to enjoy life at some point.

To be honest matt. I'm bored of you. Go find someone else to play with please.

As you wish to talk the talk, expect to be made to walk the walk.

You come across as a plastic socialist and your deliberately controversial threads have been exposed as your vanity.

As you continue to post this stuff, expect people to question it and your motives. Should you not be able to handle that, that is your problem.

I will continue to question you as and when you post this stuff, I do not swear nor insult you on a base level, but asking me to go away because you can't handle the questioning is pathetic and not allowing free speech on a public message board.

you are so right matt. Your erudite postings have been a revelation to me. keep going and I may go and join the local conservatives. i look forward to you hijacking another thread.

Pathetic. However, I hear the cry of despair. I will leave you alone on this thread after this post.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 18 Jun 14 11.08pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Jun 2014 1.10pm Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Jun 2014 9.37am Quote legaleagle at 18 Jun 2014 9.08am I think you may have missed my point re foreign policy. Of course most countries most of the time have hypocritical foreign policies. My point was that, regardless of this, many young idealistic people in those countries may feel affronted by such policies, particularly where the policies are lacking in any veneer of sophisticated rhetorical justification. In some cases (anti-Vietnam war)it can cause whole sectors of the population to feel estranged from the whole system in their countries... If we want to have any chance of understanding why some young British Muslims might start to feel estranged from the "system" here, we need to be open to the possibility that their feelings of antipathy to aspects of our foreign policy are not automatically "anti-western" but no different in that way, say, to the example of the anti-Vietnam war protesters....I think things are less simplistic and more complex than that...so, we demonise people in a simplistic kneejerk way at our peril.. There's not point missed.....We just see the world differently. Any foreign policy decision is going to annoy someone. Governments who bother with concerns over sections of their population with mixed loyalties are weak eggshell governments. A government should do what it believes in. Britain has been going to war with other Christian countries all though its history without fear from its own church goers.....If people ask for equality in terms of being 'British', which I'm happy to accept then I also don't accept any anti western attitudes....These are westerners by their own choice. I feel it is a shoehorn comparison between US Vietnam war protesters and 'British' Muslims who have mixed loyalties over foreign policy due to religion. A better comparison would be between those who objected to the wars without allegiance or religion problems being a factor. While I feel both wars were necessary given their circumstance (with Iraq being the weakest) I at least respect objections based upon going to war itself....As war is extreme by its very nature. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jun 2014 9.42am) A government should pursue the issues and policies it laid out in its manifesto. Anything outside that barring emergency issues, should be referred back to the electorate. Agreed. We definitely see and interpret the world differently. But, thanks for coming back with a reasoned response, which (whether I agree with it or not, and I don't ) at least didn't descend into some of the pathetic slagging off and dissing of posters on this thread because of their alleged personal situations, rather than arguing about the actual view expressed.
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

18 Jun 14 11.08pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 18 Jun 2014 1.10pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Jun 2014 9.37am

Quote legaleagle at 18 Jun 2014 9.08am

I think you may have missed my point re foreign policy. Of course most countries most of the time have hypocritical foreign policies. My point was that, regardless of this, many young idealistic people in those countries may feel affronted by such policies, particularly where the policies are lacking in any veneer of sophisticated rhetorical justification. In some cases (anti-Vietnam war)it can cause whole sectors of the population to feel estranged from the whole system in their countries...

If we want to have any chance of understanding why some young British Muslims might start to feel estranged from the "system" here, we need to be open to the possibility that their feelings of antipathy to aspects of our foreign policy are not automatically "anti-western" but no different in that way, say, to the example of the anti-Vietnam war protesters....I think things are less simplistic and more complex than that...so, we demonise people in a simplistic kneejerk way at our peril..

There's not point missed.....We just see the world differently.

Any foreign policy decision is going to annoy someone. Governments who bother with concerns over sections of their population with mixed loyalties are weak eggshell governments.

A government should do what it believes in.

Britain has been going to war with other Christian countries all though its history without fear from its own church goers.....If people ask for equality in terms of being 'British', which I'm happy to accept then I also don't accept any anti western attitudes....These are westerners by their own choice.

I feel it is a shoehorn comparison between US Vietnam war protesters and 'British' Muslims who have mixed loyalties over foreign policy due to religion. A better comparison would be between those who objected to the wars without allegiance or religion problems being a factor.

While I feel both wars were necessary given their circumstance (with Iraq being the weakest) I at least respect objections based upon going to war itself....As war is extreme by its very nature.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jun 2014 9.42am)

A government should pursue the issues and policies it laid out in its manifesto. Anything outside that barring emergency issues, should be referred back to the electorate.

Agreed. We definitely see and interpret the world differently. But, thanks for coming back with a reasoned response, which (whether I agree with it or not, and I don't ) at least didn't descend into some of the pathetic slagging off and dissing of posters on this thread because of their alleged personal situations, rather than arguing about the actual view expressed.

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 18 Jun 14 11.15pm
Quote kinky1960 at 18 Jun 2014 10.32pm Quote Forest Hillbilly at 16 Jun 2014 7.28am Quite a vivid question put by a presenter on BBC this weekend. Are radical Muslims the new Nazi's ? (Obviously, not ALL Muslims, just the few radical ones) I watched the disturbing pictures this morning of around 200 Iraqi soldiers who were captured by ISIS whilst in their barracks. They were then all butchered. The depravity of mankind seems to be bottoming-out with the atrocities committed in the name of religion, and in particular, Islam. As Britain, (formerly, Great Britain), tiptoes around human rights, and swerves racism, and allows Muslims to wear full face-masks, not just in public, but in airport departure points, (something that wouldn't have been tolerated during the decades of IRA activity) Isn't it time to marginalise the radical groups/individuals ? In the IRA case, Britain even used internment. But how do you combat an enemy, who have largely blended into the population, whether on these shores, or in foreign lands, and only make themselves known once the suicide bomb has detonated, the kidnap has occurred, or the streets are running in blood.(tips a nod to Enoch) Am I scare-mongering, or are these radicals a significant problem ? 9/11, 7/7, 'The Muslim Patrols' in London, and now the mobilisation of militia who are causing atrocities in the name of Islam in the power vacuum created by western military withdrawl. Would I have a happier life if I stopped reading/watching The News, or would I be complicit in ignoring issues outside my own tiny sphere of influence ? Edited by Forest Hillbilly (16 Jun 2014 8.08am) Having had the misfortune of reviewing the last 14 pages to find that this thread has descended into a cheap point scoring sniping at one another and only to find that not many posters have directly answered/commented on an interesting first post. (Where is sydtheeagle when you need him?) Lets be honest since 1945, when this country fought a war to stop facist tyranny, all we have done is try to appease other countries/races/religions. When I was growing up at school in the late sixties/early seventies, the only references to Muslim/Islam was when Richard The Lionheart led the crusades, it certainly didnt appear relevent to a country which was primarily still a Christian country with morals/respect for others way of life. Since then we have relaxed our morals/respect and allowed Europe to control our laws. We have allowed this to happen, or I should say our appointed leaders have. Mass uncontrolled immigration was a mistake ( I beleieve even Milliband has admitted this). We had no option when Amin deported those from Uganda but the human rights act which so many recently hide behind for political assylum is rediculous. Now our current primeminister has stated that Isis wishes to strike against us on our soil and that some of these individuals were born and bred here. So yes fundamental Islam which is at odds with its own people is the biggest threat since Nazism. There is as the op implied a hidden enemy within who have integrated into our society. If it kicks off here will you feel safe to see an ethnic Doctor, Dentist or even eat food that was prepared by Islamics ..... just in case!? Rivers of blood? Was Enoch ahead of his time... or should we sit back, not worry and apease in case we upset someone? Well, I don't agree with you but nobody can say you are not at least dealing with the OP's original point. But, taking one point you have made where you say the UK has only appeased other countries since 1945,I wonder where you would place the following UK military actions (and I am not expressing a view on if they were a good or bad thing): 1.Falklands 1982 2.Bombing Serbia 1999(/) 3.Troops in Bosnia 1990's 4. Troops in Sierra Leone 2000's 5.Troops in Malaysia in 1960's defending against Indonesian border incursions 6. Suez 1956 7.Korean War
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

18 Jun 14 11.15pm

Quote kinky1960 at 18 Jun 2014 10.32pm

Quote Forest Hillbilly at 16 Jun 2014 7.28am

Quite a vivid question put by a presenter on BBC this weekend.

Are radical Muslims the new Nazi's ?

(Obviously, not ALL Muslims, just the few radical ones)

I watched the disturbing pictures this morning of around 200 Iraqi soldiers who were captured by ISIS whilst in their barracks. They were then all butchered.

The depravity of mankind seems to be bottoming-out with the atrocities committed in the name of religion, and in particular, Islam.

As Britain, (formerly, Great Britain), tiptoes around human rights, and swerves racism, and allows Muslims to wear full face-masks, not just in public, but in airport departure points, (something that wouldn't have been tolerated during the decades of IRA activity)
Isn't it time to marginalise the radical groups/individuals ?
In the IRA case, Britain even used internment. But how do you combat an enemy, who have largely blended into the population, whether on these shores, or in foreign lands, and only make themselves known once the suicide bomb has detonated, the kidnap has occurred, or the streets are running in blood.(tips a nod to Enoch)

Am I scare-mongering, or are these radicals a significant problem ? 9/11, 7/7, 'The Muslim Patrols' in London, and now the mobilisation of militia who are causing atrocities in the name of Islam in the power vacuum created by western military withdrawl.

Would I have a happier life if I stopped reading/watching The News, or would I be complicit in ignoring issues outside my own tiny sphere of influence ?

Edited by Forest Hillbilly (16 Jun 2014 8.08am)

Having had the misfortune of reviewing the last 14 pages to find that this thread has descended into a cheap point scoring sniping at one another and only to find that not many posters have directly answered/commented on an interesting first post. (Where is sydtheeagle when you need him?)

Lets be honest since 1945, when this country fought a war to stop facist tyranny, all we have done is try to appease other countries/races/religions.

When I was growing up at school in the late sixties/early seventies, the only references to Muslim/Islam was when Richard The Lionheart led the crusades, it certainly didnt appear relevent to a country which was primarily still a Christian country with morals/respect for others way of life.

Since then we have relaxed our morals/respect and allowed Europe to control our laws.

We have allowed this to happen, or I should say our appointed leaders have.

Mass uncontrolled immigration was a mistake ( I beleieve even Milliband has admitted this).

We had no option when Amin deported those from Uganda but the human rights act which so many recently hide behind for political assylum is rediculous.

Now our current primeminister has stated that Isis wishes to strike against us on our soil and that some of these individuals were born and bred here.

So yes fundamental Islam which is at odds with its own people is the biggest threat since Nazism. There is as the op implied a hidden enemy within who have integrated into our society. If it kicks off here will you feel safe to see an ethnic Doctor, Dentist or even eat food that was prepared by Islamics ..... just in case!?

Rivers of blood? Was Enoch ahead of his time... or should we sit back, not worry and apease in case we upset someone?

Well, I don't agree with you but nobody can say you are not at least dealing with the OP's original point.
But, taking one point you have made where you say the UK has only appeased other countries since 1945,I wonder where you would place the following UK military actions (and I am not expressing a view on if they were a good or bad thing):

1.Falklands 1982
2.Bombing Serbia 1999(/)
3.Troops in Bosnia 1990's
4. Troops in Sierra Leone 2000's
5.Troops in Malaysia in 1960's defending against Indonesian border incursions
6. Suez 1956
7.Korean War

Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave Tirana, Albania 18 Jun 14 11.20pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Jun 2014 9.37am Quote legaleagle at 18 Jun 2014 9.08am I think you may have missed my point re foreign policy. Of course most countries most of the time have hypocritical foreign policies. My point was that, regardless of this, many young idealistic people in those countries may feel affronted by such policies, particularly where the policies are lacking in any veneer of sophisticated rhetorical justification. In some cases (anti-Vietnam war)it can cause whole sectors of the population to feel estranged from the whole system in their countries... If we want to have any chance of understanding why some young British Muslims might start to feel estranged from the "system" here, we need to be open to the possibility that their feelings of antipathy to aspects of our foreign policy are not automatically "anti-western" but no different in that way, say, to the example of the anti-Vietnam war protesters....I think things are less simplistic and more complex than that...so, we demonise people in a simplistic kneejerk way at our peril.. There's no point missed.....We just see the world differently. Any foreign policy decision is going to annoy someone. Governments who bother with concerns over sections of their population with mixed loyalties are weak eggshell governments. A government should do what it believes in. Britain has been going to war with other Christian countries all though its history without fear from its own church goers.....If people ask for equality in terms of being 'British', which I'm happy to accept then I also don't accept any anti western attitudes....These are westerners by their own choice. I feel it is a shoehorn comparison between US Vietnam war protesters and 'British' Muslims who have mixed loyalties over foreign policy due to religion. A better comparison would be between those who objected to the wars without allegiance or religion problems being a factor. While I feel both wars were necessary given their circumstance (with Iraq being the weakest) I at least respect objections based upon going to war itself....As war is extreme by its very nature. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jun 2014 5.47pm) I think there is, and your responses show it. At some point in your myopic view of the UK and the world, you will have to accept that there is a much wider perspective on things than you appreciate or are prepared to consider. Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand! My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right. (Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)
Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave

Tirana, Albania 18 Jun 14 11.20pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 18 Jun 2014 9.37am

Quote legaleagle at 18 Jun 2014 9.08am

There's no point missed.....We just see the world differently.

Any foreign policy decision is going to annoy someone. Governments who bother with concerns over sections of their population with mixed loyalties are weak eggshell governments.

A government should do what it believes in.

While I feel both wars were necessary given their circumstance (with Iraq being the weakest) I at least respect objections based upon going to war itself....As war is extreme by its very nature.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jun 2014 5.47pm)

I think there is, and your responses show it. At some point in your myopic view of the UK and the world, you will have to accept that there is a much wider perspective on things than you appreciate or are prepared to consider.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 18 Jun 14 11.20pm
Quote TI-508 at 18 Jun 2014 9.32am How many anti-Vietnam war demonstrators blew up trains and buses, killed soldiers in the streets and went off to fight for the Viet-Cong? Well, the Weather Underground in the USA in the late 60's/early 70's (which grew out of the anti-war movement) did a fair number of bombings and kidnappings...
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

18 Jun 14 11.20pm

Quote TI-508 at 18 Jun 2014 9.32am

How many anti-Vietnam war demonstrators blew up trains and buses, killed soldiers in the streets and went off to fight for the Viet-Cong?

Well, the Weather Underground in the USA in the late 60's/early 70's (which grew out of the anti-war movement) did a fair number of bombings and kidnappings...

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 18 Jun 14 11.24pm
Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 11.07pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 11.03pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.52pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.45pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.42pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.30pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.16pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 10.05pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 10.00pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 9.46pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 9.24pm Quote nickgusset at 18 Jun 2014 8.00pm Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 6.19pm You are a champagne socialist as you enjoy the benefits of a capitalist system but appear to abhor it. And if there is one trait I despise in people is duplicity and people being brazen about that. Alas we have to survive in the world in which we exist. Doesn't mean we can't stand against it though. So, what you are saying is that I can 'like' or 'follow' a social revolution in Egypt on Facebook but I am not going to give up my three bedroom house in Chislehurst or my 42in Samsung TV in order to feed the striking families but they will be consoled with my solidarity? Hmm.... I didn't know you lived in Chislehurst. Seriously, you think anyone who has a 'left' ideology has to give up the trappings of modern life? I give a lot of my time to the causes in which I believe in. I give a lot of my time defending and representing others in my union capacities- I'm not financially rewarded for it. It looks like, to those not in the Lefty inner circle, that the comforts of modern life such as a nice house, good furnishings and electrical goods, are available to you but your contribution to the cause is turning up when you are able too (baby sitters permitted) and that solidarity equals a 'like' on Facebook with whatever loony tune cause happens in the World because it lessens your middle class guilt. Let us all hope that the revolution happens on a day when you can all have comprehensive child care. you keep going on about middle class guilt. That's complete s***e. Yes I may have worked my way to middle class, but had a working class upbringing. I've had an insight in what it's like to be poor, and believe me, despite what you think, it aint an easy life. What a response! You ain't nothing but a social contrarian enjoying the easy life but haunted by guilt because of it. That is your problem and not societies but you feel you have to label everyone opposed to you as a 'cund' because of it. Bravo Gusset. The know all, say all, do nothing of Chislehurst. if you say so. Mr play the man not the issue. capitalist cund. Edited by nickgusset (18 Jun 2014 10.31pm) The fact you have given a one liner insult and not addressed the issue speaks volumes to me. Keep reaching for that rainbow and I hope the guilt subsides enough sometime to allow you to enjoy life at some point. To be honest matt. I'm bored of you. Go find someone else to play with please. As you wish to talk the talk, expect to be made to walk the walk. You come across as a plastic socialist and your deliberately controversial threads have been exposed as your vanity. As you continue to post this stuff, expect people to question it and your motives. Should you not be able to handle that, that is your problem. I will continue to question you as and when you post this stuff, I do not swear nor insult you on a base level, but asking me to go away because you can't handle the questioning is pathetic and not allowing free speech on a public message board. you are so right matt. Your erudite postings have been a revelation to me. keep going and I may go and join the local conservatives. i look forward to you hijacking another thread. Pathetic. However, I hear the cry of despair. I will leave you alone on this thread after this post. Cry of despair? You are sooooo funny.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 18 Jun 14 11.24pm

Quote matt_himself at 18 Jun 2014 11.07pm