disgusting (but typical) leftwing hypocrisy

I DID consider housing a Syrian asylum seeker, says Benedict: Sherlock star who famously launched a foul-mouthed rant over the Government's refugee figures says he can't take any in because he has a baby.

Benedict Cumberbatch stunned his audience when he delivered a foul-mouthed rant after his Hamlet performance at the Barbican, blasting the Government for agreeing to accept only 20,000 Syrian refugees over five years.

Now, two years after the outburst, the Old Harrovian claims he and his wife, theatre director Sophie Hunter, 39, were so committed to the cause that they considered housing refugees in their £2.7 million Hampstead home — but decided against it.

‘People were saying, “You’ve got a home, why don’t you house refugees?” And we did look into it.

‘But we had, then, a very new baby — maybe four or five months old,’ explains the Sherlock star, 41, referring to his oldest son, Christopher.

‘Maybe people had a point. I understand why some might think I should be housing people instead of complaining about a government not doing it.

‘But I was trying to raise awareness that we can do more as a society. Because I do feel we are able to do more than just recovering bodies.’

Speaking to the Big Issue, the tireless thespian, now also a father to six-month-old Hal Auden, admits that despite the backlash he received for his nightly diatribes, he would do it again.

‘I’m a human being and it was a human crisis and I got over-excited and said things in a rather grand manner some nights,’ he adds.

‘You stick your head above the parapet and that happens.

‘But we raised money for children in need.

‘So I don’t regret doing it for a second, and I will do it again, even if it does put me in the firing line.’

Cumberbatch attacked the ‘utter disgrace of the British Government’ for not doing enough just four months after receiving a CBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours.

He shocked audience members as he shouted: ‘F*** the politicians!’ while pleading with them to leave donations in buckets to alleviate the crisis.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4908592/Benedict-Cumberbatch-DID-consider-housing-Syrians.html

"Famous person shows compassion and raises money for a charitable cause.

RW moron decries said person because the cause is for foreigners and ludicrously thinks said person is a hypocrite for not letting foreigners stay is his own home.

RW moron also does NOTHING to help."

Eilzel wrote:"Famous person shows compassion and raises money for a charitable cause.

RW moron decries said person because the cause is for foreigners and ludicrously thinks said person is a hypocrite for not letting foreigners stay is his own home.

RW moron also does NOTHING to help."

obviously you don't understand what hypocrisy means

allow me to demonstrate

famous rich person raises money from non famous or rich people but gives nothing himself

famous rich person attacks government for not taking in refugees, famous rich person refuses to take in refugees

Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

dont weasel out of it for him

he is a hypocrite, like like all celebrities and lefties

its always the same, these lefties dont ever have to live among the immigrants, instead its ordinary people who suddenly find their towns are no go zones, i don't remember cumberbands wife getting her pussy grabbed on news eve in Cologne square, do you??

george clooney , another cretin preaching about open borders turns around and scurries back to the US because its become too dangerous living near the immigrants.

all these liberals preaching to us what nothing to do with the immigrants they tell the rest of us to accommodate, even now in the wake of the wave of immigrant terrorism ripping Europe apart these fuckers will still be calling for more of the same.

"bring the immigrants in bring the immigrants in just don't bring them into MY home or within 100 mile radius of where my home is"

So... you have no proof then. I'll say no more.

Eilzel wrote:So... you have no proof then. I'll say no more.

don't really need to, i think the hypocrisy speaks for itself

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

I can't stand pontificating luvvies. They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes. Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did. We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute. That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:"Famous person shows compassion and raises money for a charitable cause.

RW moron decries said person because the cause is for foreigners and ludicrously thinks said person is a hypocrite for not letting foreigners stay is his own home.

RW moron also does NOTHING to help."

obviously you don't understand what hypocrisy means

allow me to demonstrate

famous rich person raises money from non famous or rich people but gives nothing himself

famous rich person attacks government for not taking in refugees, famous rich person refuses to take in refugees

One easy and simple question for you, SmellyFucktardBandit...

You keep on claiming that various rich/famous/celebrity people  "give nothing (themselves).." to help refugees/poor people/disaster victims, during other fund-raising efforts..

Where is your evidence to back up your bluster  ?   How would you know who gives what ?  Or are you happy to just keep on making up your lies..

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:So... you have no proof then. I'll say no more.

don't really need to, i think the hypocrisy speaks for itself

The only 'hypocrisy' here comes from you, you snivelling little fascist keyboard warrior and third-rate troll...

I doubt whether you have ever given to any charities, or volunteered any help to any cause or emergency/disaster effort..

More likely you would be among those looking to see how you can profit from others' misfortunes.

Eilzel wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

i would prefer the rich and famous to match the humble actions of Donald trump and mike pence, they are old men and yet went to to lift and shift supplies for the hurricane victims. (didnt see obama there though)

meanwhile the rich and famous got "down and dirty" in a telethon raising other peoples money.

how noble

smelly-bandit wrote:I DID consider housing a Syrian asylum seeker, says Benedict: Sherlock star who famously launched a foul-mouthed rant over the Government's refugee figures says he can't take any in because he has a baby.

Benedict Cumberbatch stunned his audience when he delivered a foul-mouthed rant after his Hamlet performance at the Barbican, blasting the Government for agreeing to accept only 20,000 Syrian refugees over five years.

Now, two years after the outburst, the Old Harrovian claims he and his wife, theatre director Sophie Hunter, 39, were so committed to the cause that they considered housing refugees in their £2.7 million Hampstead home — but decided against it.

‘People were saying, “You’ve got a home, why don’t you house refugees?” And we did look into it.

‘But we had, then, a very new baby — maybe four or five months old,’ explains the Sherlock star, 41, referring to his oldest son, Christopher.

‘Maybe people had a point. I understand why some might think I should be housing people instead of complaining about a government not doing it.

‘But I was trying to raise awareness that we can do more as a society. Because I do feel we are able to do more than just recovering bodies.’

Speaking to the Big Issue, the tireless thespian, now also a father to six-month-old Hal Auden, admits that despite the backlash he received for his nightly diatribes, he would do it again.

‘I’m a human being and it was a human crisis and I got over-excited and said things in a rather grand manner some nights,’ he adds.

‘You stick your head above the parapet and that happens.

‘But we raised money for children in need.

‘So I don’t regret doing it for a second, and I will do it again, even if it does put me in the firing line.’

Cumberbatch attacked the ‘utter disgrace of the British Government’ for not doing enough just four months after receiving a CBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours.

He shocked audience members as he shouted: ‘F*** the politicians!’ while pleading with them to leave donations in buckets to alleviate the crisis.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4908592/Benedict-Cumberbatch-DID-consider-housing-Syrians.html

This really is the worst and most flawed argument going. That people rightly say we should and can do more. That suddenly the onus is only on that person to open their door.

I mean do  we apply this warped logic, when we say we should help Veterans who are sleeping rough in the street?

How many here have rightly condemned how wrong this is and yet do fuck all about it and open their homes to them?

We are a nation that wants to do the best for people and that means as a nation.

If you are going to apply this logic, that you must do yourself, what you moan about on. Then countless people will fall short on this, that matters to them.

The reality is, collectively as a nation, do we help people in need?

Yes or no.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Eilzel wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

No, I'm criticising him for being a hypocrite. He's already backpedalled by saying he regrets what he said. If you're going to stand up and preach to people you better lead by example, or shut the fuck up.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

No, I'm criticising him for being a hypocrite.   He's already backpedalled by saying he regrets what he said. If you're going to stand up and preach to people you better lead by example, or shut the fuck up.

So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Eilzel wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

Horatio's idiotic nastiness here doesn't surprise me in the least...

She's most likely "cut from the same cloth" as Smelly, Tommy, Stormee...
Nasty uncaring and uncharitable little shits, the whole bunch of them.

(And she's also a lying, racist troll as well, just like Smelly --  which is staying on topic, too..)

anyone seen obama???

smelly-bandit wrote:



anyone seen obama???

More off-topic trolling from His SmellySillyBumness...

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

i would prefer the rich and famous to match the humble actions of Donald trump and mike pence, they are old men and yet went to to lift and shift supplies for the hurricane victims. (didnt see obama there though)

meanwhile the rich and famous got "down and dirty" in a telethon raising other peoples money.

how noble

More bullshit lies from the odious greedy back corner of the forum....

You really are full of shite today, Smellyone..

Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:



anyone seen obama???

More off-topic trolling from His SmellySillyBumness...

not really off topic is it??

this show's the difference between men like trump and "men" like cumberbatch

men like trump get down and dirty helping people, cretins like the hundreds of hollywood lefty luvvies are are trampling each other in their mad backwards dash to get away from any refugee that approaches them, mumbling and finding hundreds of excuses why they just cant possibly take in refugees

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

possibly because he didn't want the refugee to rape and murder his child??

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

So you do not want the nation to house people, but individuals.

You do not want refugees to be independent?

Thorin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

No, I'm criticising him for being a hypocrite.   He's already backpedalled by saying he regrets what he said. If you're going to stand up and preach to people you better lead by example, or shut the fuck up.

So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Notice the lying troll Horatio provides no actual rationale to back her racially-provoked bullshit !!!

Just like she provides no actual reasoning to back her regular attacks against me, Quill, veya or Andy..

The more nasty and selfish bulldust she posts on here, the more she confirms my previous criticisms of her regular trolling behaviour.

Horatio only seems to be in this thread to boost Smelly's nastiness..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Notice the lying troll Horatio provides no actual rationale to back her racially-provoked bullshit !!!

Just like she provides no actual reasoning to back her regular attacks against me, Quill, veya or Andy..

The more nasty and selfish bulldust she posts on here, the more she confirms my previous criticisms of her regular trolling behaviour.

Horatio only seems to be in this thread to boost Smelly's nastiness..

I can feel the love

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

So you're criticising a privilidged man for speaking out for those less fortunate? You'd prefer the rich and famous to never speak out for those in need? Selfishness is more befitting them in your opinion?

Horatio's idiotic nastiness here doesn't surprise me in the least...

She's most likely "cut from the same cloth" as Smelly, Tommy, Stormee...
Nasty uncaring and uncharitable little shits, the whole bunch of them.

(And she's also a lying, racist troll as well, just like Smelly --  which is staying on topic, too..)

You old charmer

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

So you do not want the nation to house people, but individuals.

You do not want refugees to be independent?

No real surprises there, either....

Raggs regularly comes out as opposing charity, foreign aid, welfare, and any kind of help for those worse iff -- yet she keeps on championing and defending corporate crim's, greedy businesses,
crooked cops, establishment perverts..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Notice the lying troll Horatio provides no actual rationale to back her racially-provoked bullshit !!!

Just like she provides no actual reasoning to back her regular attacks against me, Quill, veya or Andy..

The more nasty and selfish bulldust she posts on here, the more she confirms my previous criticisms of her regular trolling behaviour.

Horatio only seems to be in this thread to boost Smelly's nastiness..

i gave you a Green for that little hissy fit mate

pure comedy

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

He probably has several spare rooms. His wife probably gave him hell over it, and he realised he then couldn't stick by his principles so had to find some excuse. Ah, blame the baby, that'll do.

smelly-bandit wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Notice the lying troll Horatio provides no actual rationale to back her racially-provoked bullshit !!!

Just like she provides no actual reasoning to back her regular attacks against me, Quill, veya or Andy..

The more nasty and selfish bulldust she posts on here, the more she confirms my previous criticisms of her regular trolling behaviour.

Horatio only seems to be in this thread to boost Smelly's nastiness..

i gave you a Green for that little hissy fit mate

pure comedy

He's the forum clown, after all.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

He probably has several spare rooms.    His wife probably gave him hell over it, and he realised he then couldn't stick by his principles so had to find some excuse.  Ah, blame the baby, that'll do.

i doubt anyone needed to give him hell over it, i think the reality is that these cretin want nothing to do with refugees of any kind.

the closest they want to get is a phone call away.

can you imagine the panic if a group of dirty syrian refugees turned up to the oscars??

smelly-bandit wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


More off-topic trolling from His SmellySillyBumness...

not really off topic is it??

this show's the difference between men like trump and "men" like cumberbatch  

men like trump get down and dirty helping people,  cretins like the hundreds of hollywood lefty luvvies are are trampling each other in their mad backwards dash to get away from any refugee that approaches them, mumbling and finding hundreds of excuses why they just cant possibly take in refugees  

You haven't provided any genuine "proof" to back ypur lies, Smelly'....

A few political Trump -friendly photo' ops with your own commentaries really doesn't back you bold claims..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So you do not want the nation to house people, but individuals.

You do not want refugees to be independent?

No real surprises there, either....

Raggs regularly comes out as opposing charity, foreign aid, welfare, and any kind of help for those worse iff --  yet she keeps on championing and defending corporate crim's, greedy businesses,
crooked cops, establishment perverts..

Can you answer my question then?

HoratioTarr wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

i gave you a Green for that little hissy fit mate

pure comedy

He's the forum clown, after all.

And yet far more intelligent than you.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Why did having a baby stop him taking him a refugee? I presume he had a spare bedroom. If he didn't, he paid too much for his house.

He probably has several spare rooms.    His wife probably gave him hell over it, and he realised he then couldn't stick by his principles so had to find some excuse.  Ah, blame the baby, that'll do.

Didn't Bob Geldof offer to take in refugees? I haven't read that he actually did, and he didn't have a baby.

smelly-bandit wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

He probably has several spare rooms.    His wife probably gave him hell over it, and he realised he then couldn't stick by his principles so had to find some excuse.  Ah, blame the baby, that'll do.

i doubt anyone needed to give him hell over it, i think the reality is that these cretin want nothing to do with refugees of any kind.

the closest they want to get is a phone call away.

can you imagine the panic if a group of dirty syrian refugees turned up to the oscars??

Smelly, Horatio, Raggs...

What a charming, caring and warm-hearted little gang..

The only thing missing is Tommy's usual signature humanitarian contributions.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So you are belittling him for making something of his life and that he then condemns what he sees as wrong?
So if you succeed in life, you are saying people have not a right to speak out on a wrong they see?
Seems a rather warped and dumb argument to me.
What does it matter if his kids do go to private school?
To say we do not have the room is born off a selfish disposition.
Who decided you can state who can or cannot live on land, you never truly own yourself?
Its an imaginary view, where we delegate land though sale, of which we have never truly owned ourselves.
If you want to talk about privilege. No matter the individuals ethnicity or skin colour. Is being born to a land, that is wealthy. That neither you, nor your ancestors did anything individually themselves to advance that society or make it wealthy. This country became wealthy by taking from others. You were lucky to be born, simple by geography, into a nation that cares for its people. Its because of a small number of innovative people that you have the knowledge and abilities you have today, as they pass them on for all to learn.

Imagine they took your stance and did not share the wisdom they had?

Notice the lying troll Horatio provides no actual rationale to back her racially-provoked bullshit !!!

Just like she provides no actual reasoning to back her regular attacks against me, Quill, veya or Andy..

The more nasty and selfish bulldust she posts on here, the more she confirms my previous criticisms of her regular trolling behaviour.

Horatio only seems to be in this thread to boost Smelly's nastiness..

I would not worry she runs away from my points, mainly as she would expose her ignorance on this mate.

She seems to have found a new pet in smelly, which is hilarious.

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

In that case, why are there homeless people on the streets?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

In that case, why are there homeless people on the streets?

Because consecutive governments have failed to tackle the problem

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:"Famous person shows compassion and raises money for a charitable cause.

RW moron decries said person because the cause is for foreigners and ludicrously thinks said person is a hypocrite for not letting foreigners stay is his own home.

RW moron also does NOTHING to help."

obviously you don't understand what hypocrisy means

allow me to demonstrate

famous rich person raises money from non famous or rich people but gives nothing himself

famous rich person attacks government for not taking in refugees, famous rich person refuses to take in refugees

Yes, it says he raised money, not that he paid anything himself. You'd think he'd get a smaller house and give tons of money to his cause really.

Actually my only problem with this guy is his reason for not taking in a refugee.  He lied.

He gave an excuse he had a baby - yes but not in a tiny little two-bed house - in a big fuck-off house where a baby wouldn't disturb a refugee and vice bloody versa.

So yeah, he should've said "I'm not taking in a refugee because I don't actually want to" not some utter garbage about "having a baby".

That's my problem with the guy. He lied and used a flimsy excuse and that makes me wonder why he needed to do that. Kinda makes his own words and cause seem rather wank.

eddie wrote:Actually my only problem with this guy is his reason for not taking in a refugee.  He lied.

He gave an excuse he had a baby - yes but not in a tiny little two-bed house - in a big fuck-off house where a baby wouldn't disturb a refugee and vice bloody versa.

So yeah, he should've said "I'm not taking in a refugee because I don't actually want to" not some utter garbage about "having a baby".

That's my problem with the guy. He lied and used a flimsy excuse and that makes me wonder why he needed to do that. Kinda makes his own words and cause seem rather wank.

Why should he need to, when the nation should house people in need?

There is nothing wrong with what he has said, in that we should do more.

The Governments are at fault, so to point blame on him, is poor to say the least

HoratioTarr wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Do you KNOW he has given nothing himself? Can you show me the proof of this claim?

When people say we should take in refugees, only a complete idiot would think that means in one's private home. It isn't as if our country doesn't have available places for people to stay or shelters or anything else.

He didn't ask people to open their homes, did he? If he did, then yes, he'd be a hypocrite. But unless you can show that that is EXACTLY what he said, then you're talking bollocks.

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

I agree. They always open their mouths about this sort of issue, and they must know what people are going to ask them - ie, why don't you give all your money to refugees or take some in as you have a very large house?

eddie wrote:Actually my only problem with this guy is his reason for not taking in a refugee.  He lied.

He gave an excuse he had a baby - yes but not in a tiny little two-bed house - in a big fuck-off house where a baby wouldn't disturb a refugee and vice bloody versa.

So yeah, he should've said "I'm not taking in a refugee because I don't actually want to" not some utter garbage about "having a baby".

That's my problem with the guy. He lied and used a flimsy excuse and that makes me wonder why he needed to do that. Kinda makes his own words and cause seem rather wank.

Exactly. He volunteered that excuse and it really didn't sound like a good one.

Raggamuffin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I can't stand pontificating luvvies.   They should stick to doing what they do best, pretending to be other people and fake heroes.   Cumberbatch isn't on a minimum wage competing for work, on years' long social housing waiting lists or struggling to get a doctor's appointment. His kid's will go to private school just like he did.   We don't have the room on this isle to open it up to all and sundry who have no means to contribute.   That's not being racist, it's an economical fact.

I agree. They always open their mouths about this sort of issue, and they must know what people are going to ask them - ie, why don't you give all your money to refugees or take some in as you have a very large house?

Why again would he need to, when the Government has a program to house refugees?

eddie wrote:Actually my only problem with this guy is his reason for not taking in a refugee.  He lied.

He gave an excuse he had a baby - yes but not in a tiny little two-bed house - in a big fuck-off house where a baby wouldn't disturb a refugee and vice bloody versa.

So yeah, he should've said "I'm not taking in a refugee because I don't actually want to" not some utter garbage about "having a baby".

That's my problem with the guy. He lied and used a flimsy excuse and that makes me wonder why he needed to do that. Kinda makes his own words and cause seem rather wank.

They egos. I think that often gets in the way of common sense.

Raggamuffin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

He probably has several spare rooms.    His wife probably gave him hell over it, and he realised he then couldn't stick by his principles so had to find some excuse.  Ah, blame the baby, that'll do.

Didn't Bob Geldof offer to take in refugees? I haven't read that he actually did, and he didn't have a baby.

yep he sure did make the offer

didnt go through with it though

eddie wrote:Actually my only problem with this guy is his reason for not taking in a refugee.  He lied.

He gave an excuse he had a baby - yes but not in a tiny little two-bed house - in a big fuck-off house where a baby wouldn't disturb a refugee and vice bloody versa.

So yeah, he should've said "I'm not taking in a refugee because I don't actually want to" not some utter garbage about "having a baby".

That's my problem with the guy. He lied and used a flimsy excuse and that makes me wonder why he needed to do that. Kinda makes his own words and cause seem rather wank.

i agree Eddie, its absolutely disgusting leftwing hypocrisy

shame on the left, shame on them i say!!!!!!!!!

Cucumberpatch, Geldof, Branson st all, shout the loaders but do nothing.

Cucumberpatch made up a total lie to wriggle off the hook. None of these have to live with immigrants, on a list for housing, jobs etc.

He is a total disgrace. Same as if Branson cared that much, he could settle thousands on his island.