Taking drugs is a human right, say MPs and peers

First topic message reminder :

Drug users have a human right to feed their habit, MPs and peers have said, as they claimed international conventions banning drugs need to be reformed. The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Drug Policy Reform said in a new report that Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights – the rights to “private and family life” – could be deployed by drug users who face prosecution.
Regulation of banned substances “needs to reflect the supremacy of human rights conventions”, the report said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11810347/Taking-drugs-is-a-human-right-say-MPs-and-peers.html



100% agree, its absurd we criminalize some drugs when both alcohol and tobacco end up causing countless medical problems each year. People have a right to do so. It should be taxed high as it is a luxery but the reasons to ban some drugs is utterly absurd. To me it would also go a long way to make drugs safer and helping tackle a massive area of crime.

As of 18 July 2005,[17] both fresh and "prepared" (that is, dried, cooked or made into a tea) psilocybin mushrooms were made illegal in the United Kingdom. Prior to this date, fresh mushrooms were widely available (even in city centre shops), but section 21 of the Drugs Act 2005 made fresh psychedelic mushrooms ("fungi containing psilocybin"), a Class A drug.[18] Prior to these laws being passed, possession and use of psilocybin and psilocin is prohibited.

so your bang on tommy just picking them is illegal now ,i have to admit the last time i even saw a Magic Mushrooms was 30 years ago

Thank you Eddie... although 'this side' of me is all really just part of 'the same side'... all part of the same objective thinking based on logic, reason, facts, common sense etc... thinking that is free from corruption/manipulation by other external forces like political correctness or agendas etc...


People often say they 'don't like some of the stuff' I say etc... but is that really because It's wrong or against logic, reason, fact, common sense etc...?


Or is it more that your own opinion is subject to manipulation...?

Your own freedom to thought is restricted by outside influences of political correctness... or the perceived pressure of falling foul of the expected conformity of such...?


Also maybe more influenced by others false accusations against me for SIXHIRB than the reality of what I've actually said being anything of the sort...!?




But anyway...


Mushrooms...


Misuse of Drugs
There are a number of fungi which contain controlled drugs. These include the Liberty Cap and some other Psilocybes (psilocin, psilocybin ) and The Panther (bufotenine). Possession of any such mushrooms without permission, whether fresh, dried or in any form of preparation, is illegal. All of the controlled drugs found in mushrooms fall into class A (the most severe offences).


http://www.foragingguide.com/mushrooms/articles/collecting/legal_aspects_of_picking_wild_mushrooms

Tomyy, tommy, tommy.
The only fact there is that is true is when you argue off negativity it will always lack reasoning, Negativity in debating feeds off dispair, it falls victim to a very negative future, one which you only see as miserable. You yourself end up creating this negative future. When your reason is based on negative emotions. Postitive emtions lead to hope, even where there is little to be found and is a better way to reason, because it is able to overcome what seems impossible. It was hope and positivity that brought about the end of The African Slave Trade. It was hope and belief that brought about the end of Apartheid. Many once when suffering under this had to believe as to not believe means giving in to negativity and dispair. This is the one true time where an actual belief is completely important. That is why religions are not beliefs based on positivity, they are build from negative views, ones of dispair of a fear of death. That it will be the end, so a negative belief system is created to falsely claim it has combated this fear of death. It hasn't, its created an illusion for people to help cope with that fear, but it never really cure that fear.

Do you see the difference?

Belief where you have faith in humanity is real. It has happened where people can and have done brought about change by doing what is right. There is always hope when we place belief in humanity, because we know humanity is real? That is why this belief is based on positivity, because we know people can have the best humanity. We cannot say the same for something we cannot see, those deities that people form to combat the unknowing, is life over when we die. If you except we all die but to accept this with

So when you say you reason with facts? No emotion is a fact and thus no emotive argument is a fact. We only reason with our emotions as to what is right, because we are human and we see how human we can be by many good acts
Have a good evening

There is nothing wrong with seeing something negative and arguing for a positive change dodge... problem is that some of you refuse to listen to the overall objective arguments, but instead just shout SIXHIRB at them in your desperate attempts to make them all go away...

Yes there is Tommy as I just explained, because negativity leads to dispair and hate and hate never achieves anything but harm and more hate to others. I listen to your reasoning but it failed to reason from the start, because your whole stand point is non-negotiable to you. You do not want to accept you can be wrong, as when you can accept that, then you will begin to understand we are continually evolving.

Whe you argue negativity when it is not based on sound reason but a negative dislike, it will never have reason. You argue with negative reasoning against love for example between two consenting adults homosexual. That is not reason but a dislike of that situation, so you throw up smoke to attempt to deflect this dislkike you have, by arguing off something you have never been able to define? Normality. The reason why you have failed is you base normality based off your negativity and not reason. That is why you lack reason, it is controlled from the start by your negative views. To reason means remaining open, which you have denied immediately the moment you dislike something.

You are already then biased against.

Oh and one last thing.
I am open to the fact from the start that there is a possibility that I maybe wrong on just anything.
Its always possible that I can be wrong, as it would be wrong to assume otherwise, because we are all continuing to learn on a great many things. I will however reason my points to why something lacks validity or any rational reasoning. Just as you are seeing here.

Anyway things to do, just argue more in the positivity where there is actual evidence of hope like that within humanity, otherwise your arguments will also lack reason when you debate based off negativity Tommy

All the best

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thank you Eddie... although 'this side' of me is all really just part of 'the same side'... all part of the same objective thinking based on logic, reason, facts, common sense etc... thinking that is free from corruption/manipulation by other external forces like political correctness or agendas etc...


People often say they 'don't like some of the stuff' I say etc... but is that really because It's wrong or against logic, reason, fact, common sense etc...?


Or is it more that your own opinion is subject to manipulation...?

Your own freedom to thought is restricted by outside influences of political correctness... or the perceived pressure of falling foul of the expected conformity of such...?


Also maybe more influenced by others false accusations against me for SIXHIRB than the reality of what I've actually said being anything of the sort...!?




But anyway...


Mushrooms...


Misuse of Drugs
There are a number of fungi which contain controlled drugs.  These include the Liberty Cap and some other Psilocybes (psilocin, psilocybin ) and The Panther (bufotenine).  Possession of any such mushrooms without permission, whether fresh, dried or in any form of preparation, is illegal.  All of the controlled drugs found in mushrooms fall into class A (the most severe offences).


http://www.foragingguide.com/mushrooms/articles/collecting/legal_aspects_of_picking_wild_mushrooms

Tommy I'll tell you what happens on forums: people don't like a point of view then you get judged by that post of view forever after. L
It's labels: people love them.

Personally. I find most labels don't stick too well.

I am sure that is the case sometimes Eddie, but my points still stand and unrefuted.

Some people don't like legitimate arguments and opinions that they have no reasonable answer to, so instead use the old leftie trick of just shouting 'racist' at it etc, when racism has absolutely nothing to do with it.


And dodge... if I see something that I think is negative as far as the general well being of the British people and/or a deliberate policy pursued by govt that goes completely against the majority democratic view of the British people, then I will post about it.


There is nothing wrong with that... in fact it is A necessity!!!

Is that so Tommy?

As stated:

Yes there is Tommy as I just explained, because negativity leads to dispair and hate and hate never achieves anything but harm and more hate to others. I listen to your reasoning but it failed to reason from the start, because your whole stand point is non-negotiable to you. You do not want to accept you can be wrong, as when you can accept that, then you will begin to understand we are continually evolving.

Whe you argue negativity when it is not based on sound reason but a negative dislike, it will never have reason. You argue with negative reasoning against love for example between two consenting adults homosexual. That is not reason but a dislike of that situation, so you throw up smoke to attempt to deflect this dislkike you have, by arguing off something you have never been able to define? Normality. The reason why you have failed is you base normality based off your negativity and not reason. That is why you lack reason, it is controlled from the start by your negative views. To reason means remaining open, which you have denied immediately the moment you dislike something.

You are already then biased against.

Waffle...

So good this waffle it leaves you unable to refute

You are misrepresenting some of my arguments as negative... when in fact, the arguments are highlighting a negatives and arguing for positive change...

Many of your arguments are negative and they are argued off negative reasoning.

Cuchulain wrote:I am sure that is the case sometimes Eddie, but my points still stand and unrefuted.

Fair enough.

No... I highlight negatives and argue for positive change...!


While you and some others just deny the reality of things that I point out (although I always provide evidence to back up what I say), and then you accuse me of All manner of things for daring to mention the inconvenient truths that you would rather sweep under the carpet and pretend don't exist!

Cuchulain wrote:Many of your arguments are negative and they are argued off negative reasoning.

Hmmmm. How exactly is an argument negative!? It's an OPINION!

Okay then: I find your arguments extremely negative on:

religion
alternative medicine
alternatives to major disasters.

Failed reasoning again Tommy.
You based what you calim to be reason off what you claim is then positive based again on your biased nagative views. You have to prove it is positive. If your reasoning effects the equality of other people it fails to positive at all. Your reasoning is based on your view being right which goes back to my original point. Your inability to see that we can all be wrong sometimes. So to claim you back thingsw up with evidence is poor again to say the least. You use bad reasoning off stats for exampl based off your own negative views which again is poor reasoning. Your views are immigrants for example are based on selfish views you have born from nothing more than privalidge based on Geography.

eddie wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Many of your arguments are negative and they are argued off negative reasoning.

Hmmmm. How exactly is an argument negative!? It's an OPINION!

Okay then: I find your arguments extremely negative on:

religion
alternative medicine
alternatives to major disasters.

How are they negative Eddie?

My arguments on religion is they deny equality, thus are am seeking equality which is a positive.
Alternative medicines lack long studies of evidence to prove if they are effective. What you are saying is that people should place trust insomething untested. That is not being negative but positive again, because you are reasoning how something could be dangerous to try that lacks evidence. You are wishing the best for the person. Where as a person arguing for alternative medicines in doing so in the negative not believing much of the known medical science we do have.
Maqjor disasters, where that one I find interesting. I have no agenda based off them, so it is very neutral my views, where as Conspiracy theorists have agendas based off their conspiracies which are formed from negativity.

Sorry Eddie, but you need to understand the basics and what is actually positive and what is negative

Hahahahahahaha perhaps you need to remember that everyone has opinions and that's all they are, so no one is wrong or right.

My arguments are against mass immigration, open borders to EU, the failure to process and remove failed/bogus asylum seekers and illegal immigrants effectively...


Mass immigration plus open door EU immigration is A negative on many levels, as well as being an affront to democracy as it has been allowed by govt against the democratic wishes of the overwhelming majority of the British people/electorate... I argue for change on all this which is arguing for a positive!!!


You have also agreed with me on this on many occasions, as well as claiming to be a Tory voter, so supporter of their promise to reduce net immigration from hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands!!!


So as we agree... then either you are a racist too for sharing these views... or I am not...!!!???





I also argue against the promotion of 'multiculturalism', which encourages immigrant groups to carry on here as they would in home country, rather than encouraging them to integrate and assimilate into British culture so as to fit in... mass immigration plus promotion of 'multiculturalism' is completely divisive and a negative effect on The indigenous population, on social cohesion as well as society in general... plus the pc agenda followed by most councils and other govt organisation and services are seen in many cases to give special treatment and privilege to other groups while at the same time banging on about 'equality' and how we are all the same etc... all true and negative and I argue to have positive changes.


Nothing wrong with any of this at all!!!


Although many here will do anything and everything they can to deny it all, and then misrepresent what I'm saying, followed by the accusations of 'racism'...!!!

Thank you for proving how negative again they are which is born from like I say a privalidged position based on geography. Of which you did nothing yourself to create the infrustrature of, though wrongly think this gives you a right to deny others, based off as seen an absurd start point you hold.

So again:

Yes there is Tommy as I just explained, because negativity leads to dispair and hate and hate never achieves anything but harm and more hate to others. I listen to your reasoning but it failed to reason from the start, because your whole stand point is non-negotiable to you. You do not want to accept you can be wrong, as when you can accept that, then you will begin to understand we are continually evolving.

Whe you argue negativity when it is not based on sound reason but a negative dislike, it will never have reason. You argue with negative reasoning against love for example between two consenting adults homosexual. That is not reason but a dislike of that situation, so you throw up smoke to attempt to deflect this dislkike you have, by arguing off something you have never been able to define? Normality. The reason why you have failed is you base normality based off your negativity and not reason. That is why you lack reason, it is controlled from the start by your negative views. To reason means remaining open, which you have denied immediately the moment you dislike something.

You are already then biased against.




To Eddie

Opinions can be reasoned on what is negative or positive as I am explaining.
Now as stated you cannot give a valid reason to deny helping people.
Valid is the key here to opinions.

More waffle and misrepresentation...


I am born into a nation of my forefathers who worked hard and built things up to make things better for themselves and to pass on to me and my fellow indigenous country folk.


Other people of other nations have had plenty of time to do this too...



We all agree on having controlled immigration and that mass immigration and open door EU policy is wrong... The overwhelming vast majority of British people feel the same And not enforcing the democratic will of the people is A hugely negative affront to democracy and The British people!!!


A huge negative that I highlight and argue for positive change!!!


Your twisting and weasel words are meaningless...

You still have not addressed any of my reasoning Tommy
You also continue to keep proving me right with your negative reasoning.
Which you claim is right based off the negative views you alreay hold of immigrants, which ios easily proven by how you often refer to them in a negative like, as if all criminal for example. You thus ensure people alreeady see that your reasoning is biased from the start in the negativity.
How you refer to migrants is what gives away your poor negative reasoning.

I have completely addressed all points...

As seen you did not, what you did was basically argue your views on immigration, which as seen are negative. You did not address my reasoning to how you debate in the negative. All you tried to do is justify your negative reasoning. As seen that is exposed easily by the fact how badly you refer to migrants in the very negative. That makes your stand point utterly biased against them from the start.

Misrepresenting again...


Just more long winded waffle just to say that anyone against mass immigration is A racist!!!


Although the allowance of mass immigration by labour govt and continued allowance by current Tory govt, is an affront to democracy and The will of the British people!!!


http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/01/07/uk-britain-immigration-survey-idUKBREA0600F20140107



Dodge... you are just showing yourself as a hypocrite and a liar here because you have previously claimed support for controlled immigration and tighter checks and limits.

Emotive response again which is still not addressing my points

Tommy you are now claiming a view is valid based on a majroity.

Woud you claim the Nazi's ideology was valid based off a winning majority?

I am easily proving your reasoning is very poor when its negative, my main point from the start. I mean how is it reason to claim a majority is a valid reason to be selfish and make a view to unfounded fear? It does not its unvalid in many aspects. So do you believe majority view held is justified as a reason to be a ratioinal reason to make a view point valid?  If so, you back the right of a majority view to persecute women, homosexuals etc, from a nation which holds a majority view on such poor views. Majority does not always mean a view is right. That above shows to you peoples views in a majority can sometimes be very wrong.

Now again when you debate in the positive it is good, when done in the negative it is as seen poor and where again you do hold very poor views of immigrants which is backed up by how you refer to them. Thus straight away your views on immigrants stem from a dislike, which is a nagative view, that will cloud any reasoning.

All you are proving is that you are an idiot and have no regard or respect for British people, our opinions/views/wishes, and no regard or respect for our parliament and democracy...


Or any other democracy for that matter!!!



So you really believe that...!?

I see Tommy still failed to graps the point
Do I respect the majority view when it is counter the well being and eqaulity of others?
No in a nut shell, otherwise I forego my view on equality. If people hold that view then I need to combat why they hold such a poor view which seeks to deny equality to others., Like I said sometimes the majority view is wrong espcially when it effects the equality of others. So clearly as i stated you back a view based on a majority even if bad to be a valid reason. I see the lol's have come out and Tommy has resorted to once again immaturity when I shows how he argues in the nagative.
Its his last line of defense which means I have no need to post anymore as you have conceeded to my points.

Night Tommy, but at least we now know you do not question a view if its a majority, where as I do. Thank goodness others were like me before otherwise the African slave trade would have never ended.


Debate has run its course, you fail to address my reasoning.

Cheers

Show me this majority view I support that is affecting the equality of others...!?

Cuchulain wrote:I see Tommy still failed to graps the point
Do I respect the majority view when it is counter the well being and eqaulity of others?
No in a nut shell, otherwise I forego my view on equality. If people hold that view then I need to combat why they hold such a poor view which seeks to deny equality to others., Like I said sometimes the majority view is wrong espcially when it effects the equality of others. So clearly as i stated you back a view based on a majority even if bad to be a valid reason. I see the lol's have come out and Tommy has resorted to once again immaturity when I shows how he argues in the nagative.
Its his last line of defense which means I have no need to post anymore as you have conceeded to my points.

Night Tommy, but at least we now know you do not question a view if its a majority, where as I do. Thank goodness others were like me before otherwise the African slave trade would have never ended.


Debate has run its course, you fail to address my reasoning.

Cheers

Sorry DIdge but the views you are expressing on this thread are not quite the same as the views you were expressing on an earlier thread in a discussion with me where you were actually on the same page as Tommy about immigration and how it has impacted on this country with racial tensions and xenophobia rife and now you want more just like you were saying on the thread before the last one.

Here's that thread which you will see that you ended up using racially aggrivated language and xenophobic comments towards me.

Here is that thread - read it all...

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t7680-ukip-magazine-brands-gay-pride-march-parade-of-depravity#160781

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:I see Tommy still failed to graps the point
Do I respect the majority view when it is counter the well being and eqaulity of others?
No in a nut shell, otherwise I forego my view on equality. If people hold that view then I need to combat why they hold such a poor view which seeks to deny equality to others., Like I said sometimes the majority view is wrong espcially when it effects the equality of others. So clearly as i stated you back a view based on a majority even if bad to be a valid reason. I see the lol's have come out and Tommy has resorted to once again immaturity when I shows how he argues in the nagative.
Its his last line of defense which means I have no need to post anymore as you have conceeded to my points.

Night Tommy, but at least we now know you do not question a view if its a majority, where as I do. Thank goodness others were like me before otherwise the African slave trade would have never ended.


Debate has run its course, you fail to address my reasoning.

Cheers

Sorry DIdge but the views you are expressing on this thread are not quite the same as the views you were expressing on an earlier thread in a discussion with me where you were actually on the same page as Tommy about immigration and how it has impacted on this country with racial tensions and xenophobia rife and now you want more just like you were saying on the thread before the last one.

Here's that thread which you will see that you ended up using racially aggrivated language and xenophobic comments towards me.

Here is that thread - read it all...

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t7680-ukip-magazine-brands-gay-pride-march-parade-of-depravity#160781

So your view here is to stir again and say that a person must stick to previous views?
Sorry that poor tactic is as bad as it get s from you Irn.
I make views I change them and that makes me human.
So are you now going to hold me to any previous view if I change a view for the better?
Of course I could be mistaken and you were not intending to stir, but then you must explain how people must stick to previous comments and not be able to change their views?

I await your reasoning with anticipation

Cuchulain wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:I see Tommy still failed to graps the point
Do I respect the majority view when it is counter the well being and eqaulity of others?
No in a nut shell, otherwise I forego my view on equality. If people hold that view then I need to combat why they hold such a poor view which seeks to deny equality to others., Like I said sometimes the majority view is wrong espcially when it effects the equality of others. So clearly as i stated you back a view based on a majority even if bad to be a valid reason. I see the lol's have come out and Tommy has resorted to once again immaturity when I shows how he argues in the nagative.
Its his last line of defense which means I have no need to post anymore as you have conceeded to my points.

Night Tommy, but at least we now know you do not question a view if its a majority, where as I do. Thank goodness others were like me before otherwise the African slave trade would have never ended.


Debate has run its course, you fail to address my reasoning.

Cheers

Sorry DIdge but the views you are expressing on this thread are not quite the same as the views you were expressing on an earlier thread in a discussion with me where you were actually on the same page as Tommy about immigration and how it has impacted on this country with racial tensions and xenophobia rife and now you want more just like you were saying on the thread before the last one.

Here's that thread which you will see that you ended up using racially aggrivated language and xenophobic comments towards me.

Here is that thread - read it all...

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t7680-ukip-magazine-brands-gay-pride-march-parade-of-depravity#160781

So your view here is to stir again and say that a person must stick to previous views?
Sorry that poor tactic is as bad as it get s from you Irn.
I make views I change them and that makes me human.
So are you now going to hold me to any previous view if I change a view for the better?
Of course I could be mistaken and you were not intending to stir, but then you must explain how people must stick to previous comments and not be able to change their views?

I await your reasoning with anticipation

I'm not stirring. You can change your mind but if racial tensions and xenephobia were rife then is it not rife now to the extent that more immigrants can come in? I've never been against immigration and I'm still not against it and I fully support helping people in distress whoever they are.
I'm just looking for consistency in debates on policy Didge....that's all.

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

So your view here is to stir again and say that a person must stick to previous views?
Sorry that poor tactic is as bad as it get s from you Irn.
I make views I change them and that makes me human.
So are you now going to hold me to any previous view if I change a view for the better?
Of course I could be mistaken and you were not intending to stir, but then you must explain how people must stick to previous comments and not be able to change their views?

I await your reasoning with anticipation

I'm not stirring. You can change your mind but if racial tensions and xenephobia were rife then is it not rife now to the extent that more immigrants can come in? I've never been against immigration and I'm still not against it and I fully support helping people in distress whoever they are.
I'm just looking for consistency in debates on policy Didge....that's all.

So if i can change my mind on anything, then why are you dragging up something from the past I have said, which I proved with evidence that you collect my views, which furthers leads to a view you are stirring?
You are looking to stir is blatantly obvious Irn and hence why your ploy here failed.
It actually shows I admit i can be wrong, maybe you should try that sometime, because I am yet to see you do that.

Cuchulain wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

So your view here is to stir again and say that a person must stick to previous views?
Sorry that poor tactic is as bad as it get s from you Irn.
I make views I change them and that makes me human.
So are you now going to hold me to any previous view if I change a view for the better?
Of course I could be mistaken and you were not intending to stir, but then you must explain how people must stick to previous comments and not be able to change their views?

I await your reasoning with anticipation

I'm not stirring. You can change your mind but if racial tensions and xenephobia were rife then is it not rife now to the extent that more immigrants can come in? I've never been against immigration and I'm still not against it and I fully support helping people in distress whoever they are.
I'm just looking for consistency in debates on policy Didge....that's all.

So if i can change my mind on anything, then why are you dragging up something from the past I have said, which I proved with evidence that you collect my views, which furthers leads to a view you are stirring?
You are looking to stir is blatantly obvious Irn and hence why your ploy here failed.
It actually shows I admit i can be wrong, maybe you should try that sometime, because I am yet to see you do that.

No Didge, this forum collects your views and stores them. The problem here is that you haven't just changed your miind once, you have actually changed it twice. First you were all for immigration and then you blatantly changed your mind on the other thread and what really was so bad about that was you using racially and xenephobic language to dismiss my views and then you now come on this thread to promote the very same points that I was back then.
I'm sure I have been wrong on many things in the past but on this issue I believe I am right with my views on immigration and I think you actually agree with that based on what you are saying on this thread.

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

So if i can change my mind on anything, then why are you dragging up something from the past I have said, which I proved with evidence that you collect my views, which furthers leads to a view you are stirring?
You are looking to stir is blatantly obvious Irn and hence why your ploy here failed.
It actually shows I admit i can be wrong, maybe you should try that sometime, because I am yet to see you do that.

No Didge, this forum collects your views and stores them.  The problem here is that you haven't just changed your miind once, you have actually changed it twice. First you were all for immigration and then you blatantly changed your mind on the other thread and what really was so bad about that was you using racially and xenephobic language to dismiss my views and then you now come on this thread to promote the very same points that I was back then.
I'm sure I have been wrong on many things in the past but on this issue I believe I am right with my views on immigration and I think you actually agree with that based on what you are saying on this thread.

Sorry you are nothing but a liar.
There was a decent debate here and you are the one obsessed here jumping in trying to look clever and it backfired on you because you are that pathetic. You then claim I have not changed based on yout opinion which counts for jack shit  as ifd your views are important when as seen you wish to impose making women coverup. So you jumped in on this thread and ended up with egg on your face because Irn you are nothing more than a pathetic shit stirrer. Except now I am going to respond to your childish immaturitry with the contempt it deserves
You jumped on here because you wanted to look big  and as i do not have time for idiots, of which you most certainly are.
The fact you are wrong on just about everything is where you go wrong and yet I never see you admit when you are wrong.
You jumped in here for no other reason but your obsession with me. Who else scollects posters views? Nobody but you and again it backfires on you and shows you up for how pathetic you are mate.
I dismiss your views because they are so poor Irn and like here you offer no reason but trying to stir hence why I have no respect for posters who lack maturity as you do.