Updated rules, and some commentary on them

First topic message reminder :

The updated rules are under "About NewsFix" at the top of the page. Here's a copy of them:

"NewsFix members include veterans of Shortnews.com and the defunct NewsHabit.net, along with a large influx of members who have found us through ForumMotion and other places.

As the name implies, NewsFix is a forum for the sharing and discussion of news.

It is not a place to carry out personal quarrels with other members, nor a place to discuss other forums, nor a place for posting hate speech against minority groups.

Thus, the first guideline is that a post should, in the spirit of a news forum, be of interest to anyone looking in the category in which it's placed. It follows that replies to such posts should be of potential interest to anyone looking in.

It is accepted that discussions will become heated and that insults will be swapped between members, but lines of common decency and propriety should not be crossed:

Posts that are obviously engineered to insult or provoke other members are not acceptable (action or discipline subject to moderator discretion).

Likewise, posts that are racist, homophobic or otherwise contain hate speech are unacceptable, and those who create such posts are subject to discipline including permanent banning.

Please feel free to PM one of our admins -- Ben_Reilly, Lurker, Caution, Veya_Victaous and Irn Bru-- if you need help. Otherwise, enjoy yourself!"

As of now, everyone is subject to administrator or moderator action if they don't follow these rules. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Just to throw out an example or two of what I'm talking about:

If you were to say, "I'm a Christian and I believe homosexuality is wrong and that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed, and that we must join together to stop the gay agenda," that is your opinion, stated civilly, and it would be allowed.

Resort to hate speech, however, and you could be disciplined.

Please simply ask yourself if you're behaving like a civilized person before you post in anger. I am guilty of doing that; we're all guilty of it, and nobody expects perfection.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Catman wrote:

Did that the other day.

What d'you mean, "the other day"?

For how long - 30 minutes?

I ignored all the posts, all of the posts made during that period were abusive replies to my threads, that had nothing to do with the subject matter of the threads.

.....About half a day, as far as i can recall.

eddie wrote:

Catman wrote:



Done that and got the T shirt.

Makes no difference at all.

Phil it isn't "Done that" it's about "Doing it"

It's a permanent change. If people know you're trying it on for size they're gonna make you take it off.
It's got to be who you are.

Oh....It isn't just me that has been on the receiving end.

eddie wrote:OH. MY. GOD.

He called me this
she called me that
you're right wing
I'm a chicken wing
He's a Nazi
She's a turdinabirdbath

Blah
Fucking
Blah.

Eddie!  

I am not and never have been a turdinabirdbath.

sphinx wrote:

eddie wrote:OH. MY. GOD.

He called me this
she called me that
you're right wing
I'm a chicken wing
He's a Nazi
She's a turdinabirdbath

Blah
Fucking
Blah.

Eddie!  

I am not and never have been a turdinabirdbath.

Nope, you're a CrowinaBlowJob hahahahahaha I haven't forgotten you know......   

Yeah I probably should not have written that

still never mind - the blokes still love me   

sphinx wrote:Yeah I probably should not have written that

still never mind - the blokes still love me   

Hahahahahaha you scarred some of us for life   

eddie wrote:

sphinx wrote:Yeah I probably should not have written that

still never mind - the blokes still love me   

Hahahahahaha you scarred some of us for life   

Bet none of the scars were on the blokes lol

sphinx wrote:

eddie wrote:



Hahahahahaha you scarred some of us for life   

Bet none of the scars were on the blokes lol

Hahahahahaha you frightened David   

eddie wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Bet none of the scars were on the blokes lol

Hahahahahaha you frightened David   

I do have a risqué response to that - but I will be good and not put it.

sphinx wrote:

eddie wrote:




Hahahahahaha you frightened David   

I do have a risqué response to that - but I will be good and not put it.

spoilsport

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:
There's nothing convoluted about it if you actually bother to think it through, rather than having a knee-jerk, emotion-based reaction to it.

To expand upon an illustration that I used before talking with Sphinx, it's the difference between bashing Barack Obama for being a Democrat and bashing him for being black. If you can't see the difference between those two things, you're just stupid, I'm sorry.

And again who are you to be telling people what they should and should not be offended by and how much offence they should take to different insults?

  

LAST TIME I looked, Ben was only the owner and administrator of this here forum.

 ://?roflmao?/:  

AND HERE we see Sphinx up to her old tricks again ~ once again refusing to  follow normal rules and guidelines ~ while not accepting the PROPER definition of words or respecting other peoples' opinions..

NEXT she will claim that words only mean what she wants them to mean, while any of her friends insults or abuses are really only "opinions" instead, by her twisted "definitions"...    

sphinx wrote:.....................

Not to mention that Nazis were a socialist party.

  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!! Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..  
 

eddie wrote:
I can't keep up with who's who and who's not speaking to whom!
Who is beekeeper?

......................

  

ARE you incapable of comprehending what you read ???

You probably don't even know what a profile is either, anyway - do you, "eddie" !   

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:.....................

Not to mention that Nazis were a socialist party.

  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

"Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism


When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?

http://mises.org/daily/1937

Tess. wrote:

Beekeeper wrote:
  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

"Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

And?

Nationalistic party

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

And again who are you to be telling people what they should and should not be offended by and how much offence they should take to different insults?

  

LAST TIME I looked, Ben was only the owner and administrator of this here forum.

 ://?roflmao?/:  

AND HERE we see Sphinx up to her old tricks again ~ once again refusing to  follow normal rules and guidelines ~ while not accepting the PROPER definition of words or respecting other peoples' opinions..

NEXT she will claim that words only mean what she wants them to mean, while any of her friends insults or abuses are really only "opinions" instead, by her twisted "definitions"...    

Where have I refused to follow normal rules?

I am quite capable of following rules that I disagree with while making my opinion on why I disagree with them clear.

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:.....................

Not to mention that Nazis were a socialist party.

  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

Isnt twat an insult to my gender?

Or does it have a different meaning where you are?

PhilDidge wrote:

Tess. wrote:

"Nazism, or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus), is the ideology and practice associated with the 20th-century German Nazi Party and..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

And?

Nationalistic party

You posted while I was editing. This should be a separate thread I think - interesting debate. (Specially for a Nazi like me   )

Tess you are no Nazi,

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

There's nothing convoluted about it if you actually bother to think it through, rather than having a knee-jerk, emotion-based reaction to it.

To expand upon an illustration that I used before talking with Sphinx, it's the difference between bashing Barack Obama for being a Democrat and bashing him for being black. If you can't see the difference between those two things, you're just stupid, I'm sorry.

Thank you for your considered opinion on my mental capacity.... appreciated.  

My responses to issues are thought through just as much as yours or anyone else's...
................

I am talking about your clearly expressed view, in this thread, that it is "far more civil" to call someone a Nazi than to make a racist or homophobic slur.

It most certainly is not, and I am amazed, but becoming increasingly unsurprised, that you should contemplate any circumstances under which you would condone a poster on your forum being allowed, repeatedly, to use the word "Nazi" as a highly offensive and gratuitous insult against other posters on the spurious grounds that his intent is in some ludicrous way meant to refer to their politics.

And if you can't comprehend that, then any stupidity in this discussion emanates......

  

I can clearly see where your stupidity emanates from, Fred !

WERE you born this thick and pompous a prat, Fred ~ or did you have to work hard at it ?   

Beekeeper wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thank you for your considered opinion on my mental capacity.... appreciated.  

My responses to issues are thought through just as much as yours or anyone else's...
................

I am talking about your clearly expressed view, in this thread, that it is "far more civil" to call someone a Nazi than to make a racist or homophobic slur.

It most certainly is not, and I am amazed, but becoming increasingly unsurprised, that you should contemplate any circumstances under which you would condone a poster on your forum being allowed, repeatedly, to use the word "Nazi" as a highly offensive and gratuitous insult against other posters on the spurious grounds that his intent is in some ludicrous way meant to refer to their politics.

And if you can't comprehend that, then any stupidity in this discussion emanates......

  

I can clearly see where your stupidity emanates from, Fred !

WERE you born this thick and pompous a prat, Fred ~ or did you have to work hard at it ?      

Bee, you are being rather silly here, Me lord is no idiot and far from it, neither is Tess, Sphinx etc they have their views on abusive words, which they feel strongly are wrong, just as sure you must hold strong views on things you do not like, so can we not allow this to descend into another name calling fest.

Thanks

Beekeeper wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thank you for your considered opinion on my mental capacity.... appreciated.  

My responses to issues are thought through just as much as yours or anyone else's...
................

I am talking about your clearly expressed view, in this thread, that it is "far more civil" to call someone a Nazi than to make a racist or homophobic slur.

It most certainly is not, and I am amazed, but becoming increasingly unsurprised, that you should contemplate any circumstances under which you would condone a poster on your forum being allowed, repeatedly, to use the word "Nazi" as a highly offensive and gratuitous insult against other posters on the spurious grounds that his intent is in some ludicrous way meant to refer to their politics.

And if you can't comprehend that, then any stupidity in this discussion emanates......

  

I can clearly see where your stupidity emanates from, Fred !

WERE you born this thick and pompous a prat, Fred ~ or did you have to work hard at it ?      

  

Beekeeper wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thank you for your considered opinion on my mental capacity.... appreciated.  

My responses to issues are thought through just as much as yours or anyone else's...
................

I am talking about your clearly expressed view, in this thread, that it is "far more civil" to call someone a Nazi than to make a racist or homophobic slur.

It most certainly is not, and I am amazed, but becoming increasingly unsurprised, that you should contemplate any circumstances under which you would condone a poster on your forum being allowed, repeatedly, to use the word "Nazi" as a highly offensive and gratuitous insult against other posters on the spurious grounds that his intent is in some ludicrous way meant to refer to their politics.

And if you can't comprehend that, then any stupidity in this discussion emanates......

  

I can clearly see where your stupidity emanates from, Fred !

WERE you born this thick and pompous a prat, Fred ~ or did you have to work hard at it ?      

Who do you think appears more intelligent to a stranger looking here - the person giving a well-written mature reply; or the one using different itallics, pictures and emoticons to make his point? Maybe I'm being unfair to you as I don't know you from other forums - are you still at school?

sphinx wrote:

Beekeeper wrote:
  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

Isnt twat an insult to my gender?

Or does it have a different meaning where you are?

 
   IT actually does have a few meanings, down here - depending on it's context..

IN the way that I've used it above it means "silly, twit, idiot, thick.." ~ and isn't referring to any body parts, when used in this way..

IT can also be used to mean "fool" or "prat" in yet another of it's uses ~ as where, for example, someone may say to his drunken mate to "stop acting like a twat !" if he's getting a bit noisy or obnoxious.   

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Isnt twat an insult to my gender?

Or does it have a different meaning where you are?

 
   IT actually does have a few meanings, down here - depending on it's context..

IN the way that I've used it above it means "silly, twit, idiot, thick.." ~ and isn't referring to any body parts, when used in this way..

IT can also be used to mean "fool" or "prat" in yet another of it's uses ~ as where, for example, someone may say to his drunken mate to "stop acting like a twat !" if he's getting a bit noisy or obnoxious.   

Well where I come from its meaning is female genitalia - and has use similar to that of the see you next Tuesday word.

So if you are going to use it which of our 2 differing but equally valid definitions should be considered correct?

good post tess and sphinx

Although sometimes used as a reference to the female genitalia, the word twat is more often used in various other ways:

As a derogatory insult, a pejorative meaning a fool, a stronger alternative to the word twit – 'He can be a complete twat' (often used in the UK)[4]
To hit something (or someone) hard or violently – 'Let's get out there and twat it!'[5]

In August 2008, the publisher of a children's book, My Sister Jodie by Jacqueline Wilson, decided to reprint the word twat as twit in future editions of the novel so as not to offend readers or their parents.[6]

In a radio interview on 29 July 2009, the leader of the British Conservative Party, David Cameron apologized for any offence caused after he used the word twat on live radio during a breakfast radio show interview on Absolute Radio:

The trouble with Twitter, the instantness of it – too many twits might make a twat.
—David Cameron, [7]

sphinx wrote:

Beekeeper wrote:
 
   IT actually does have a few meanings, down here - depending on it's context..

IN the way that I've used it above it means "silly, twit, idiot, thick.." ~ and isn't referring to any body parts, when used in this way..

IT can also be used to mean "fool" or "prat" in yet another of it's uses ~ as where, for example, someone may say to his drunken mate to "stop acting like a twat !" if he's getting a bit noisy or obnoxious.   

Well where I come from its meaning is female genitalia - and has use similar to that of the see you next Tuesday word.

So if you are going to use it which of our 2 differing but equally valid definitions should be considered correct?

Don't mind him, he talks out of his clacker - and his view aren't worth a brown eyed mullet.  :<:i}: 

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Isnt twat an insult to my gender?

Or does it have a different meaning where you are?

 
   IT actually does have a few meanings, down here - depending on it's context..

IN the way that I've used it above it means "silly, twit, idiot, thick.." ~ and isn't referring to any body parts, when used in this way..

IT can also be used to mean "fool" or "prat" in yet another of it's uses ~ as where, for example, someone may say to his drunken mate to "stop acting like a twat !" if he's getting a bit noisy or obnoxious.   

Most derogatory words have many meanings Beekeeper.

Some examples:

Paki, gay, homo, faggot, puffter....

It all depends on how the person on the receiving end feels. Usually, if they ask for you to stop, I would (depends how reasonable and polite they are, in my opinion).

It's a tricky situation, hence why I asked Ben to sort this out, weeks ago.

He didn't listen, then he did, but it appears he hasn't really.

Beekeeper wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thank you for your considered opinion on my mental capacity.... appreciated.  

My responses to issues are thought through just as much as yours or anyone else's...
................

I am talking about your clearly expressed view, in this thread, that it is "far more civil" to call someone a Nazi than to make a racist or homophobic slur.

It most certainly is not, and I am amazed, but becoming increasingly unsurprised, that you should contemplate any circumstances under which you would condone a poster on your forum being allowed, repeatedly, to use the word "Nazi" as a highly offensive and gratuitous insult against other posters on the spurious grounds that his intent is in some ludicrous way meant to refer to their politics.

And if you can't comprehend that, then any stupidity in this discussion emanates......

  

I can clearly see where your stupidity emanates from, Fred !

WERE you born this thick and pompous a prat, Fred ~ or did you have to work hard at it ?      

Any pomposity on my part developed as a direct result of having  attempted, in the past, futilely to communicate at an intelligent level with a congenitally idiotic  "Orstrylian" whose serially self-proclaimed "knowledge" of agriculture appears to be limited to shovelling cow shit from one barn to another.

Whichever English judge sentenced your ancestors to transportation deserved to have been garrotted with his own wig...by the Australians.

Now, why don't you go off and shag a kangaroo, or whatever it is that you spend your time doing?

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Isnt twat an insult to my gender?

Or does it have a different meaning where you are?

 
   IT actually does have a few meanings, down here - depending on it's context..

IN the way that I've used it above it means "silly, twit, idiot, thick.." ~ and isn't referring to any body parts, when used in this way..

IT can also be used to mean "fool" or "prat" in yet another of it's uses ~ as where, for example, someone may say to his drunken mate to "stop acting like a twat !" if he's getting a bit noisy or obnoxious.   

And I'm sure those words are directed at you on a regular basis.

AHOY THERE ALLAKAKA!.

What's that cat doing in your avatar?.........Explain yourself man.

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:.....................

Not to mention that Nazis were a socialist party.

  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

The Nazi party was The National Socialist Party. It was indistinguishable from the Communist Party of Russia. Both killed millions. It is you whose the Donk Bee not Sphinx.

Strangely enough even their policies on the economy were very like yours as are the Far right BNP.

Donkl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Clarkson wrote:

Beekeeper wrote:
  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

The Nazi party was The National Socialist Party. It was indistinguishable from the Communist Party of Russia. Both killed millions. It is you whose the Donk Bee not Sphinx.

Strangely enough even their policies on the economy were very like yours as are the Far right BNP.

Donkl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really, Clarkson, you shouldn't be insulting that most erudite and accomplished of posters, Mr Beekeeper, in such an unseemly manner.

Can you not recognise pure brilliance and a superior intellect when they confront you?

Do you not know that he has a B.Sc degree in agriculture awarded to him because he could spell COW and an M.Sc because he knows what a cow is?

Why, even his Winnie the Pooh avatar is an indication of his magnificent literary achievements; in fact, he is currently working on his Doctorate by learning how to spell "Eeyore."

Fie on you, you cad!

I've always said that the National Socialist Party was "socialist" in the exact same way that the Patriot Act was "patriotic."

Clarkson wrote:

Beekeeper wrote:
  

THE Nazi's were never "socialists" !!!  Not by ANY meaning of the word..

ARE you REALLY that stupidly ignorant ?

OF COURSE you are !

You twat..    
 

The Nazi party was The National Socialist Party. It was indistinguishable from the Communist Party of Russia. Both killed millions. It is you whose the Donk Bee not Sphinx.

Strangely enough even their policies on the economy were very like yours as are the Far right BNP.

Donkl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Balderdash, they were distinguishable through different political ideologies

It's not difficult, treat people the way you want to be treated. Post to people the way in which you wish to be posted to. Respect is earned, not to be taken as given.  

If you want to put your thoughts across and change someone's opinion you are much more likely to do so if you treat that poster decently than trying to beat it into them  

Ben_Reilly wrote:I've always said that the National Socialist Party was "socialist" in the exact same way that the Patriot Act was "patriotic."

And yet the Nazis and the USSR both called socialist killed millions. Fancy that.

The left are still killing millions in North Korea I presume they are Tories/Republicans when it suits comrade. The left in the UK gave up secrets to the Soviets long after it became clear Soviet Russia was a killing machine fancy that.

Socialism works by oppression much the same as the Nazis.

Think of it as circle - at the 12 o'clock position you have centre politics - you can go left or right to varying degrees but if you keep going they join up at the 6 o'clock position where their is no difference

Clarkson wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:I've always said that the National Socialist Party was "socialist" in the exact same way that the Patriot Act was "patriotic."

And yet the Nazis and the USSR both called socialist killed millions. Fancy that.

The left are still killing millions in North Korea I presume they are Tories/Republicans when it suits comrade. The left in the UK gave up secrets to the Soviets  long after it became clear Soviet Russia was a killing machine fancy that.

Socialism works by oppression much the same as the Nazis.

I just got done asking members to stop associating the left with Stalin and North Korea, just as I've asked the left to stop associating the right with the Nazis. Please stop.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Clarkson wrote:

And yet the Nazis and the USSR both called socialist killed millions. Fancy that.

The left are still killing millions in North Korea I presume they are Tories/Republicans when it suits comrade. The left in the UK gave up secrets to the Soviets  long after it became clear Soviet Russia was a killing machine fancy that.

Socialism works by oppression much the same as the Nazis.

I just got done asking members to stop associating the left with Stalin and North Korea, just as I've asked the left to stop associating the right with the Nazis. Please stop.

It's unlikely that he will ever stop with the abuse, he has certain obsessions, that cannot be healed imo...Perhaps he could try to prove this forum wrong, by stopping his abuse and campaign against certain members...and then just to post like a decent human being.

Beekeeper wrote:

eddie wrote:
I can't keep up with who's who and who's not speaking to whom!
Who is beekeeper?

......................

  

ARE you incapable of comprehending what you read ???

You probably don't even know what a profile is either, anyway - do you, "eddie" !       

Erm no. I am a silly sausage do forgive me Italics man   

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Clarkson wrote:

And yet the Nazis and the USSR both called socialist killed millions. Fancy that.

The left are still killing millions in North Korea I presume they are Tories/Republicans when it suits comrade. The left in the UK gave up secrets to the Soviets  long after it became clear Soviet Russia was a killing machine fancy that.

Socialism works by oppression much the same as the Nazis.

I just got done asking members to stop associating the left with Stalin and North Korea, just as I've asked the left to stop associating the right with the Nazis. Please stop.

You may be of that opinion we are not. Are you really saying he only version of history is your??

Really how very Soviet Union of you.

Catman wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

I just got done asking members to stop associating the left with Stalin and North Korea, just as I've asked the left to stop associating the right with the Nazis. Please stop.

It's unlikely that he will ever stop with the abuse, he has certain obsessions, that cannot be healed imo...Perhaps he could try to prove this forum wrong, by stopping his abuse and campaign against certain members...and then just to post like a decent human being.

Phil you are a nasty leech on society who delights n insulting others and then running to teacher. Ben is foolish enough to back you he will tire of you in the end unless he too is a militant bitter intolerant homosexual. In which case you are home and dry but it will be ultimately a very small left wing forum.

Clarkson wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Clarkson wrote:

And yet the Nazis and the USSR both called socialist killed millions. Fancy that.

The left are still killing millions in North Korea I presume they are Tories/Republicans when it suits comrade. The left in the UK gave up secrets to the Soviets  long after it became clear Soviet Russia was a killing machine fancy that.

Socialism works by oppression much the same as the Nazis.

I just got done asking members to stop associating the left with Stalin and North Korea, just as I've asked the left to stop associating the right with the Nazis. Please stop.

You may be of that opinion we are not. Are you really saying he only version of history is your??

Really how very Soviet Union of you.

I honestly don't think I'd ever say "he only version of history is your" unless I was unfortunate enough to suffer a stroke.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Clarkson wrote:

You may be of that opinion we are not. Are you really saying he only version of history is your??

Really how very Soviet Union of you.

I honestly don't think I'd ever say "he only version of history is your" unless I was unfortunate enough to suffer a stroke.

  

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Clarkson wrote:

You may be of that opinion we are not. Are you really saying he only version of history is your??

Really how very Soviet Union of you.

I honestly don't think I'd ever say "he only version of history is your" unless I was unfortunate enough to suffer a stroke.

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Nearly had apple crumble and custard all over the screen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Clarkson wrote:

Catman wrote:

It's unlikely that he will ever stop with the abuse, he has certain obsessions, that cannot be healed imo...Perhaps he could try to prove this forum wrong, by stopping his abuse and campaign against certain members...and then just to post like a decent human being.

Phil you are a nasty leech on society who delights n insulting others and then running to teacher. Ben is foolish enough to back you he will tire of you in the end unless he too is a militant bitter intolerant homosexual. In which case you are home and dry but it will be ultimately a very small left wing forum.

home & dry , I thought   KY gel stopped that.

Sassy wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

I honestly don't think I'd ever say "he only version of history is your" unless I was unfortunate enough to suffer a stroke.

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Nearly had apple crumble and custard all over the screen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He makes similar mistakes quite a lot recently, he should go to the back of the class!