Has Anybody Here Been On Benefits?

First topic message reminder :

24th April 2014

How long for?

What was the reason you first went on them?

Shady wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
But they are all holes in the dam! And I do my fair share of voicing my concerns over Corporate greed (though not on this forum, serious subjecs are few and far between the forum frollicks on here).  The welfare hole is leaking a pretty big pool of water too you know, so shouldn't be ignored.  And tbh I don't moan much about it, it was just coincidence that Andy's thread came up just after I'd spoken to my daughter.

Tess we all know that too much money is being dished out in the form of benefits.Even those who pretend to oppose the Tories recent benefit cutbacks can count & have a reasonable understanding of financial economics.Which means that they must know that too much is paid out in benefits.

Why they lie I don't know.Because they must know that there is no financial or any other kind of benefit to society when benefits are given to Roma gypsies over here who don't work & have never had any intention of working.

It's mystifying as to why a left winger would somehow justify those gypsie being paid benefits.

its not really out of the goodness of their own hearts shady

the lefties will use the gypsies and everyone else as a buffer. the scrounging left have stacked the likes of the gypsies and other assorted scrounging scum in a layered defense in front of them to throw under the bus as and when, and then fall back to continue defending the next expendable set of benefits scroungers

its just a delaying action

if it came down to a choice of lefties or gypsies getting the benefits i somehow doubt the left will be so vocal in their defense of their former gypsy allies, in fact i pretty much guarantee the left would be leading the fight for mass deportations of anyone who is taking their benefits

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Shady wrote:

I've got a better idea for you Ben.Come & live over here for a few months & you'd soon see the benefits rip off in action.

Maybe you can tell me why this government allows Roma gypsies to live here on benefits when there was no hope of them getting jobs in the first place.

I'd be interested to read your reasoning.

Has it occurred to you that even if I was living over there, I might still perceive the situation much differently from those who whinge on about scroungers all day?

The whingers start from a place where they suspect everyone on benefits doesn't deserve them, and they proceed to look for confirming evidence. I start with the assumption that most people aren't cheaters, and that you need to have evidence that they are cheaters before you start accusing them.

the "whingers"

you think people who have legitimate concerns about the widespread corruption and abuse of the benefits system are "whinging"

the abuse is well documented so its not a case of assuming, its a case of accepting that it happens which you seem to want to ignore

FYI its the "whingers" who are the ones paying for the system

if you're happy to pay for a system that you know is abused, and happy for scum like scatman to say "fuck you ben you can pay for me because i cant be bothered to work"

if you're happy to do that then you need some hardcore therapy pal

and since you don't live here and don't pay for that system, i don't really think you are in a position to criticize those who do

smelly_bandit wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Has it occurred to you that even if I was living over there, I might still perceive the situation much differently from those who whinge on about scroungers all day?

The whingers start from a place where they suspect everyone on benefits doesn't deserve them, and they proceed to look for confirming evidence. I start with the assumption that most people aren't cheaters, and that you need to have evidence that they are cheaters before you start accusing them.

the "whingers"

you think people who have legitimate concerns about the widespread corruption and abuse of the benefits system are "whinging"

the abuse is well documented so its not a case of assuming, its a case of accepting that it happens which you seem to want to ignore

FYI its the "whingers" who are the ones paying for the system

if you're happy to pay for a system that you know is abused, and happy for scum like scatman to say "fuck you ben you can pay for me because i cant be bothered to work"  

if you're happy to do that then you need some hardcore therapy pal

and since you don't live here and don't pay for that system, i don't really think you are in a position to criticize those who do  

I think perhaps that there is more awareness of what taxes are being spent on now. Many people have always paid taxes, and I doubt they thought much about where they going. I never used to think about it - I just accepted tax as a fact of life. Now we read a lot in the press about benefits, and we're much more aware of the issues involved.

For example, this "bedroom tax" issue is supposed to get people's sympathy, but it doesn't have that effect on everyone. When someone who pays tax can't afford to have a house with spare bedrooms, it's a bit annoying to hear people who have their rent paid for them whinging about having to contribute to it because they have a spare room which they don't need.

Then some people say that if those people downsized into a private rental, the rent would probably be more, so no public money will be saved, but to me it's not just about the money, it's about fairness. Those who work and pay for themselves should not be worse off in terms of lifestyle than those who don't.

Not to mention the irony that if those spare bedrooms were let out to lodgers those whinging about having to contribute to them would have more money.

Remember JSA rules mean that if you have a spare room you pay 11% of your rent if on housing benefit (of course if you are working the amount you pay stays the same) if you have a spare room. If you take a lodger then the room is not spare so you go back to 100% housing benefit plus you get the rent being paid - you keep the first £20 and 50% of anything over £20.

So single person on JSA charging £50 rent for their spare room gets and £35 a week money in their pocket - that is a 50% increase in their money.

What I cannot understand is why they were not doing this before the introduction of contributing towards empty bedrooms - why would anyone want to stay on £72 a week when they could have £107?

sphinx wrote:Not to mention the irony that if those spare bedrooms were let out to lodgers those whinging about having to contribute to them would have more money.

Remember JSA rules mean that if you have a spare room you pay 11% of your rent if on housing benefit (of course if you are working the amount you pay stays the same) if you have a spare room.  If you take a lodger then the room is not spare so you go back to 100% housing benefit plus you get the rent being paid - you keep the first £20 and 50% of anything over £20.

So single person on JSA charging £50 rent for their spare room gets and £35 a week money in their pocket - that is a 50% increase in their money.

What I cannot understand is why they were not doing this before the introduction of contributing towards empty bedrooms - why would anyone want to stay on £72 a week when they could have £107?

Oh, but you can't expect people on HB to do something as awful as actually have another person in their house Sphinx. No - people on HB must be allowed to have a house all to themselves - it's their right! Also, what if the lodger turns out to be a mass murderer? It's far too dangerous.

As I said, many people who buy or rent get someone in to share the rent or to help withe mortgage, and we don't hear about them being murdered in their beds very often.

Raggamuffin wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

the "whingers"

you think people who have legitimate concerns about the widespread corruption and abuse of the benefits system are "whinging"

the abuse is well documented so its not a case of assuming, its a case of accepting that it happens which you seem to want to ignore

FYI its the "whingers" who are the ones paying for the system

if you're happy to pay for a system that you know is abused, and happy for scum like scatman to say "fuck you ben you can pay for me because i cant be bothered to work"  

if you're happy to do that then you need some hardcore therapy pal

and since you don't live here and don't pay for that system, i don't really think you are in a position to criticize those who do  

I think perhaps that there is more awareness of what taxes are being spent on now. Many people have always paid taxes, and I doubt they thought much about where they going. I never used to think about it - I just accepted tax as a fact of life. Now we read a lot in the press about benefits, and we're much more aware of the issues involved.

For example, this "bedroom tax" issue is supposed to get people's sympathy, but it doesn't have that effect on everyone. When someone who pays tax can't afford to have a house with spare bedrooms, it's a bit annoying to hear people who have their rent paid for them whinging about having to contribute to it because they have a spare room which they don't need.

Then some people say that if those people downsized into a private rental, the rent would probably be more, so no public money will be saved, but to me it's not just about the money, it's about fairness. Those who work and pay for themselves should not be worse off in terms of lifestyle than those who don't.

exactly right

the left are maniacs who present with a pathological hatred of all things decent

hard work

fairness

honesty

its not bigotry to want people to work for their lifestyle

its not unfair to say that a single benefits claimant needs only one room

it makes me sick that these scroungers and yes i say scroungers, because in my opinion anyone who isn't genuinely disabled to the level of unworkable doesn't need ongoing benefits.

i agree that people fall on hard times may need help from time to time and i agree that we should do everything we can to help them,that is where the benefits systems is good, that is what the benefits system was meant to be

but a lifetime on benefits?? several generations of one family living on benefits??

an ENTIRE fucking street that is famous because of its benefits scroungers???

fuck my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

scivvying scum like scatman shrieking about Nazism and fascism because he thinks we exist simply to pay for his lifestyle, that is taken via a system that has been corrupted and abused under dishonesty and deceit, need putting in large dormitories and fed the most basic of nutrients and left to rot because that really is the only lifestyle they should be entitled to

Shady wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

Aren't you happy then that the Tories have cut benefits then?

The Universal credit system is a shambles apparently and people can no longer afford to feed their children so have to resort to food banks.I believe it was you that linked that newspaper article saying that hungry people were stealing food from said food banks,the peasants.

So the divide between rich and poor has never been wider and the average family is over one thousand ,seven hundred pounds a year worse off.Benefits ate slashed,families going to food banks.

A Britain to be proud of I'm sure.

Good afternoon Fluffy Bunny.

Fluffy,the concept & use of food banks has been proven to be false & ill used.

There is prove from more than one source including volunters at the food banks who say that anybody can use them & are regularly doing so.

Many of the so called users are spending their benefits on drugs,booze & Rambo DVDs.

The banks are just a left wing scam designed to make the present government look bad.

I didn't see this post before but its a joke isn't it,like your left wing people support pe*dophiles post was a joke??

It has to be trolling,I don't accept this is the genuine viewpoint of an articulate adult.

smelly_bandit wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think perhaps that there is more awareness of what taxes are being spent on now. Many people have always paid taxes, and I doubt they thought much about where they going. I never used to think about it - I just accepted tax as a fact of life. Now we read a lot in the press about benefits, and we're much more aware of the issues involved.

For example, this "bedroom tax" issue is supposed to get people's sympathy, but it doesn't have that effect on everyone. When someone who pays tax can't afford to have a house with spare bedrooms, it's a bit annoying to hear people who have their rent paid for them whinging about having to contribute to it because they have a spare room which they don't need.

Then some people say that if those people downsized into a private rental, the rent would probably be more, so no public money will be saved, but to me it's not just about the money, it's about fairness. Those who work and pay for themselves should not be worse off in terms of lifestyle than those who don't.

exactly right

the left are maniacs who present with a  pathological hatred of all things decent

hard work

fairness

honesty

its not bigotry to want people to work for their lifestyle

its not unfair to say that a single benefits claimant needs only one room

it makes me sick that these scroungers and yes i say scroungers, because in my opinion anyone who isn't genuinely disabled to the level of unworkable doesn't need ongoing benefits.

i agree that people fall on hard times may need help from time to time and i agree that we should do everything we can to help them,that is where the benefits systems is good, that is what the benefits system was meant to be

but a lifetime on benefits?? several generations of one family living on benefits??

an ENTIRE fucking street that is famous because of its benefits scroungers???

fuck my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

scivvying scum like scatman shrieking about Nazism and fascism because he thinks we exist simply to pay for his lifestyle, that is taken via a system that has been corrupted and abused under dishonesty and deceit, need putting in large dormitories and fed the most basic of nutrients and left to rot because that really is the only lifestyle they should be entitled to  

Even someone who lost their job through no fault of their own needs to accept that they can't have the same level of comfort as they did before - at least until they get another job, unless they were wise enough to save for that rainy day. Of course they should get help, but they can't expect the tax payers to pay for luxuries or spare rooms.

It really does seem to me that "left wing" means thinking that everyone should have the same lifestyle regardless of effort, and that "right wing" means taking responsibility for yourself and accepting that reward is generally the result of your own efforts.

Of course there will always be people who are rich and not by their own efforts. Some people are born into families with money, although having a rich daddy doesn't necessarily equate to being rich oneself of course. There's absolutely no point in anyone comparing themselves to these people - most people have to work for the lifestyle they want.

When it comes to working, there are some people who love their jobs, and others who absolutely hate them, and then in the middle are large numbers of people who like some aspects and hate others. I hear about people who are desperate to leave their jobs but they can't find another one, and so they have to keep going. They are paying for others to be able to sit at home and do nothing, and yet those people who are being paid for seem to expect the same standard of living as those who actually go to work.

left wing philosophy is one of envy and greed

lefties see people who work hard and have a good life and they see rich families

they believe that these people have somehow "robbed" society of more than their share of the riches and that is the reason why the some of the financially poor lefties, are poor

ie they have been forced into poverty by the hard working and the rich

so as always with the left its never their fault, its always someone else to blame for their state of affairs, and so the left believe that they should be compensated for the perceived wrong done to them and obviously its the rich and hard working who they believe should compensate them

so the outrage over cutting benefits isn't over people suddenly starving or freezing its pure materialism

FluffyBunny wrote:

Shady wrote:

Good afternoon Fluffy Bunny.

Fluffy,the concept & use of food banks has been proven to be false & ill used.

There is prove from more than one source including volunters at the food banks who say that anybody can use them & are regularly doing so.

Many of the so called users are spending their benefits on drugs,booze & Rambo DVDs.

The banks are just a left wing scam designed to make the present government look bad.

I didn't see this post before but its a joke isn't it,like your left wing people support pe*dophiles post was a joke??

It has to be trolling,I don't accept this is the genuine viewpoint of an articulate adult.

I have him on ignore.

He's going on about Peter Tatchell, and calling him a paedophile...It's a boring RW/Christian smear campaign.

    

smelly_bandit wrote:left wing philosophy is one of envy and greed

lefties see people who work hard and have a good life and they see rich families

they believe that these people have somehow "robbed" society of more than their share of the riches and that is the reason why the some of the financially poor lefties, are poor

ie they have been forced into poverty by the hard working and the rich  

so as always with the left its never their fault, its always someone else to blame for their state of affairs, and so the left believe that they should be compensated for the  perceived wrong done to them and obviously its the rich and hard working who they believe should compensate them

so the outrage over cutting benefits isn't over people suddenly starving or freezing its pure materialism

Yes, this is what I don't like about the attitude of many people who do indeed appear to be "left wing". I see it on here all the time - nothing is ever their own fault, and there is always an excuse why they can't help themselves. Even if something is not their fault, they need to understand that life isn't always fair, and that envying others is a waste of time.

Raggamuffin wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:left wing philosophy is one of envy and greed

lefties see people who work hard and have a good life and they see rich families

they believe that these people have somehow "robbed" society of more than their share of the riches and that is the reason why the some of the financially poor lefties, are poor

ie they have been forced into poverty by the hard working and the rich  

so as always with the left its never their fault, its always someone else to blame for their state of affairs, and so the left believe that they should be compensated for the  perceived wrong done to them and obviously its the rich and hard working who they believe should compensate them

so the outrage over cutting benefits isn't over people suddenly starving or freezing its pure materialism

Yes, this is what I don't like about the attitude of many people who do indeed appear to be "left wing". I see it on here all the time - nothing is ever their own fault, and there is always an excuse why they can't help themselves. Even if something is not their fault, they need to understand that life isn't always fair, and that envying others is a waste of time.

You do know that smelly is a south African, and supported Breivik (Norway killer) when he murdered LW children?

Catman wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, this is what I don't like about the attitude of many people who do indeed appear to be "left wing". I see it on here all the time - nothing is ever their own fault, and there is always an excuse why they can't help themselves. Even if something is not their fault, they need to understand that life isn't always fair, and that envying others is a waste of time.

You do know that smelly is a south African, and supported Breivik (Norway killer) when he murdered LW children?

I'm speaking to him about benefits and the attitudes of LW/RW people, not Breivik.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Catman wrote:

You do know that smelly is a south African, and supported Breivik (Norway killer) when he murdered LW children?

I'm speaking to him about benefits and the attitudes of LW/RW people, not Breivik.

Carry on....We know that you're a warped whore anyway. :aspukeas: :aspukeas: :aspukeas: 

Catman wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm speaking to him about benefits and the attitudes of LW/RW people, not Breivik.

Carry on....We know that you're a warped whore anyway. :aspukeas: :aspukeas: :aspukeas: 

Could you please stop the abuse? It's wrecking the thread. If you want to talk about Breivik, start another thread.

smelly_bandit wrote:left wing philosophy is one of envy and greed

lefties see people who work hard and have a good life and they see rich families

they believe that these people have somehow "robbed" society of more than their share of the riches and that is the reason why the some of the financially poor lefties, are poor

ie they have been forced into poverty by the hard working and the rich  

so as always with the left its never their fault, its always someone else to blame for their state of affairs, and so the left believe that they should be compensated for the  perceived wrong done to them and obviously its the rich and hard working who they believe should compensate them

so the outrage over cutting benefits isn't over people suddenly starving or freezing its pure materialism

None of this is true,I'm left wing and I don't envy anyone.

If someone works hard and is able to purchase lots of material things good luck to them and I wish them well.

I don't want vulnerable people to suffer in an increasingly Orwellian world.As I have stated time and time again,it is empathy that seperates us from the animals.if we don't look after those in poverty and their children,what sort of people are we?

Catman wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

I didn't see this post before but its a joke isn't it,like your left wing people support pe*dophiles post was a joke??

It has to be trolling,I don't accept this is the genuine viewpoint of an articulate adult.

I have him on ignore.

He's going on about Peter Tatchell, and calling him a paedophile...It's a boring RW/Christian smear campaign.

    

I see.

I may put him on ignore.I don't think there is any value to be added to a debate by calling people supportive of pe*dophile's. It's just unsavoury and unnecessary.

FluffyBunny wrote:

Catman wrote:

I have him on ignore.

He's going on about Peter Tatchell, and calling him a paedophile...It's a boring RW/Christian smear campaign.

    

I see.

I may put him on ignore.I don't think there is any value to be added to a debate by calling people supportive of pe*dophile's. It's just unsavoury and unnecessary.

The RW do that a lot on here, if you're gay, you have to post no gay related threads, and suck up to the RW on most occasions to get by  

....I couldn't lick the paws of Tess the dog....Could you?  

Oh look - just more abuse and off-topic stuff from the lefties.

Catman wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, this is what I don't like about the attitude of many people who do indeed appear to be "left wing". I see it on here all the time - nothing is ever their own fault, and there is always an excuse why they can't help themselves. Even if something is not their fault, they need to understand that life isn't always fair, and that envying others is a waste of time.

You do know that smelly is a south African, and supported Breivik (Norway killer) when he murdered LW children?

How's Doug??

Dead yet or just in pain??

Tell me Phil I have been wondering

How do you guys.............well you know?? Get intimate??

I mean he is diseased you presumably don't want his disease so how do you keep things intimate??

It must be a strain on you having to be his carer all the time, can't imagine it's very sexy having to wipe his bottom and clean up his sick

Or do you have the warped relationship where he hires prostitutes and watches you screw them whilst calling out his name??

Does it ever get too much?? Do you ever think "just die already"

Ever thought, "I could push him down these stairs and make it look like an accident"

Is Doug rich?? Is that why you take care of him?? Hoping for the big win when aids finally gets bored playing with him??

Want more? Next time you accuse me of supporting terrorism I can start on your dearly departed mother

How's that sound??

Sounds great to me

Glad we had this chat

Let's do it again some time  

Complaint lodged with admin.

FluffyBunny wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:left wing philosophy is one of envy and greed

lefties see people who work hard and have a good life and they see rich families

they believe that these people have somehow "robbed" society of more than their share of the riches and that is the reason why the some of the financially poor lefties, are poor

ie they have been forced into poverty by the hard working and the rich  

so as always with the left its never their fault, its always someone else to blame for their state of affairs, and so the left believe that they should be compensated for the  perceived wrong done to them and obviously its the rich and hard working who they believe should compensate them

so the outrage over cutting benefits isn't over people suddenly starving or freezing its pure materialism

None of this is true,I'm left wing and I don't envy anyone.

If someone works hard and is able to purchase lots of material things good luck to them and I wish them well.

I don't want vulnerable people to suffer in an increasingly Orwellian world.As I have stated time and time again,it is empathy that seperates us from the animals.if we don't look after those in poverty and their children,what sort of people are we?

"Vulnerable people"

Leftwing PC talk for lazy scrounging benefits claimants who don't want to work

Catman wrote:Complaint lodged with admin.

Make sure you put in your accusation Phil

I warned you the other night

You think you own this forum and are entitled to abuse at will

You now know that is not the case

You have to be taught that there are consequences for your actions

smelly_bandit wrote:

FluffyBunny wrote:

None of this is true,I'm left wing and I don't envy anyone.

If someone works hard and is able to purchase lots of material things good luck to them and I wish them well.

I don't want vulnerable people to suffer in an increasingly Orwellian world.As I have stated time and time again,it is empathy that seperates us from the animals.if we don't look after those in poverty and their children,what sort of people are we?

"Vulnerable people"

Leftwing PC talk for lazy scrounging benefits claimants who don't want to work

I always wonder what people mean by "vulnerable". If they mean severely disabled people who really can't work, that's one thing, but if they just mean people who have been irresponsible and who feel they are "victims", that's another matter. A lot of people are vulnerable in different ways, but they just get on with it and do their best.

Raggamuffin wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

"Vulnerable people"

Leftwing PC talk for lazy scrounging benefits claimants who don't want to work

I always wonder what people mean by "vulnerable". If they mean severely disabled people who really can't work, that's one thing, but if they just mean people who have been irresponsible and who feel they are "victims", that's another matter. A lot of people are vulnerable in different ways, but they just get on with it and do their best.

That's the problem

"Vulnerable" is an emotive word and it's use as a blanket term

It's an example of the typical double speak used by the left for most things and like most of their double speak it's open ended and undefined

smelly_bandit wrote:

Catman wrote:Complaint lodged with admin.

Make sure you put in your accusation Phil

I warned you the other night

You think you own this forum and are entitled to abuse at will

You now know that is not the case

You have to be taught that there are consequences for your actions

He has said nothing here about anyone close to you, consider the fact I will also speak to Ben about this, because this is you thinking you can do as you please also.

I am also going to speak to Ben about Catman, once again calling Tess a Dog, which is sexist an derogatory to women.

So I suggest the pair of you reign your necks in, because the forum is both fed up of you both being vile and bringing down the forum.

So I suggest you get back to debating the pair of you and like I said you are as vile as each other.

There is no excuse for either of the abuses

Could we just stay on topic?

Raggamuffin wrote:Could we just stay on topic?

Be my guest, I am just warming both enough is enough, so to the point on benefits, it depends on what benefits you are talking about.

I have contacted Ben today, the first time in ages and have included the details of the thread on flop, where Tess the dog has done nothing but complain and slag off this site.

If Tess the RW dog finds this site so disagreeable, then Tess the dog should stick to the Nazi site flop, where she can be a Nazi and a fucking dog to her hearts content.  

Catman wrote:I have contacted Ben today, the first time in ages and have included the details of the thread on flop, where Tess the dog has done nothing but complain and slag off this site.

If Tess the RW dog finds this site so disagreeable, then Tess the dog should stick to the Nazi site flop, where she can be a Nazi and a fucking dog to her hearts content.  

Actually I have sent an email to Ben about both of you, as I ill not tolerate any form of discrimination against posters, and you are being sexist and derogatory to women, as I said you both think you can do as you please, this is going to change.

It is not down to you to decide who can debate here, whether you agree with their views or not, you can take the piss out of each other, again I do not care, but abuse about people not here and discrimination against posters is not going to be tolerated from you anymore. You make a mockery of homophobia by being sexist.

So again I suggest you reign your neck in

No didge

I only stick my neck out and get ugly AFTER I've taken abuse and issued warnings

I don't around calling people nazi - like you do or racist or fascist or homophobic - like you do on a daily basis

I don't go around lashing everyone with that kind of abuse as a matter of course

If you called me a nazi or said I supported breivik in pub, you had better believe id drill your head through the table and into the floor

I don't talk to you like that I don't talk to him like that just because I think I have the right

So yes I'm not innocent and yes sometimes I'm guilty of taking the bait and stirring it up but I do understand that it's not acceptable.

however if you or Ben thinks I'm going to sit meekly by while that bloke lies about me and accuses me of supporting the murder of innocent children???

I suggest you need to have a bit of a rethink

You want this forum to be better? get rid of HIM and watch the difference

This post was made by Didge who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

...And will be continued to be ignored by admin, like admin has always ignored his complaints!

        

The fucking prick wanker didge, who no one takes any notice of, and most have him on ignore because he is such a pussy and an insignificant wank stain.     

smelly_bandit wrote:No didge

I only stick my neck out and get ugly AFTER I've taken abuse and issued warnings

I don't around calling people nazi - like you do or racist or fascist or homophobic - like you do on a daily basis

I don't go around lashing everyone with that kind of abuse as a matter of course

If you called me a nazi or said I supported breivik in pub, you had better believe id drill your head through the table and into the floor

I don't talk to you like that I don't talk to him like that just because I think I have the right

So yes I'm not innocent and yes sometimes I'm guilty of taking the bait and stirring it up but I do understand that it's not acceptable.

however if you or Ben thinks I'm going to sit meekly by while that bloke lies about me and accuses me of supporting the murder of innocent children???

I suggest you need to have a bit of a rethink

You want this forum to be better? get rid of HIM and watch the difference

Nobody is going to get rid of, and people who are racist, of which you are by your own admission of claiming blacks as inferior is not a lie, when I proved this in deabte, or an insult but the truth, just as catman is being sexist, you both many want to deny you both are, but you both are.

I do not care if you are racist, but if you are racist against a poster, or sexist as catman, then it is going to stop and both of you are as bad as each other trying to get each other or others removed, is it pathetic and shows the mentality of both of you is childish and does not have a place on this forum, hence the warning as you will both end up causing your own downfall here.


You call Mandela a terrorist, yet I call him a a great man, which you claim I back a terrorist do you not, so you show even more how hypocritical you are, you said on Flap, about my two uncles killed by the IRA deserved it, when I made no such poor comment about you, in fact this is a trade mark of yours it seems, so please do not give me pathetic excuses for you being vile smelly.

You are well capable of holding your own in a debate without resorting to being vile and I do not call people a Nazi I say they argue and use the same arguments they did. I may have called you once this ages in the past, but never here, so again you are looking to excuse being vile, which is no excuse


Again reign your neck in, because to be honest many are getting fed up with it and I do not want to see any rid of here

Didge wrote:

Catman wrote:I have contacted Ben today, the first time in ages and have included the details of the thread on flop, where Tess the dog has done nothing but complain and slag off this site.

If Tess the RW dog finds this site so disagreeable, then Tess the dog should stick to the Nazi site flop, where she can be a Nazi and a fucking dog to her hearts content.  

Actually I have sent an email to Ben about both of you, as I ill not tolerate any form of discrimination against posters, and you are being sexist and derogatory to women, as I said you both think you can do as you please, this is going to change.

It is not down to you to decide who can debate here, whether you agree with their views or not, you can take the piss out of each other, again I do not care, but abuse about people not here and discrimination against posters is not going to be tolerated from you anymore. You make a mockery of homophobia by being sexist.

So again I suggest you reign your neck in

Catman also called me a whore just because I didn't want to discuss Breivik on this thread.

Carry on....We know that you're a warped whore anyway.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Actually I have sent an email to Ben about both of you, as I ill not tolerate any form of discrimination against posters, and you are being sexist and derogatory to women, as I said you both think you can do as you please, this is going to change.

It is not down to you to decide who can debate here, whether you agree with their views or not, you can take the piss out of each other, again I do not care, but abuse about people not here and discrimination against posters is not going to be tolerated from you anymore. You make a mockery of homophobia by being sexist.

So again I suggest you reign your neck in

Catman also called me a whore just because I didn't want to discuss Breivik on this thread.

Carry on....We know that you're a warped whore anyway.

Which is in this thread reported to Ben, again that is derogatory to women and discrmination and I have as I said sent this to Ben, which he will see for himself

FluffyBunny wrote:

Catman wrote:

I have him on ignore.

He's going on about Peter Tatchell, and calling him a paedophile...It's a boring RW/Christian smear campaign.

    

I see.

I may put him on ignore.I don't think there is any value to be added to a debate by calling people supportive of pe*dophile's. It's just unsavoury and unnecessary.

You need to get out more.

Piss off didge

No one takes any notice of you anyway

Mandela WAS a terrorist you support him

Do the maths

I never supported breivik I never condoned his actions in fact I openly condemned him for what he did and I'm not about to let some little chav like Phil smear me like That

I'm happy to take abuse, I don't whine and I don't complain but I have warned folks that there are certain that will draw a response from me

Ben needs to get a grip of this if he doesn't want his forum run into the ground by that bloke

He had done it before and he will do it again

Anyway do whatever

Back the leftwing scroungers

smelly_bandit wrote:Piss off didge

No one takes any notice of you anyway

Mandela WAS a terrorist you support him

Do the maths

I never supported breivik I never condoned his actions in fact I openly condemned him for what he did and I'm not about to let some little chav like Phil smear me like That

I'm happy to take abuse, I don't whine and I don't complain but I have warned folks that there are certain that will draw a response from me

Ben needs to get a grip of this if he doesn't want his forum run into the ground by that bloke

He had done it before and he will do it again

I take abuse all the time and do not give a care in the world about it and the reality is though such posts as you and catman do, go below the line, end of story, so just take the piss back, there is no need to go to such poor levels as you well know. You do not help this forum get a grip by doing the same.
Mandela was a man fighting oppression, who sought to commit sabotage against a regime that treated him no better and other black people with less rights than animals and he then after being locked up and abused, then brought about reconciliation, which he achieved, when he could of done the opposite, something you neglect. So you are happy to say that I support terrorism, yet I do not go off the rails with any views on your family etc, when some comments you have made and you did not have any sympathy because the victims were left wing, which you cannot deny, which was also poor taste. That does not mean you support Brevik, but you did try to argue because of left views that children would be legitimate targets being at a Labour venue.

So take your own advice and let Ben sort out, are you really concerned at what Catman says to you, because by reacting as you do, you are proving that you are and clearly you also take notice of me, because you debate me more than any on here


Just leave the crap out, I may not agree with you on much, but fail to see why you get dragged into such stupidity

Hello?

About benefits?

Raggamuffin wrote:Hello?

About benefits?

What about them, do you have children?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Hello?

About benefits?

What a about them, do you have children?

What do you mean what about them? Have you not read the thread? I realise that it was sabotaged by Catman, and then later on by you, but perhaps you could debate the topic of the thread - ie benefits.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


What a about them, do you have children?

What do you mean what about them? Have you not read the thread? I realise that it was sabotaged by Catman, and then later on by you, but perhaps you could debate the topic of the thread - ie benefits.

I am asking if you have children and thus like many receive child benefits?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What do you mean what about them? Have you not read the thread? I realise that it was sabotaged by Catman, and then later on by you, but perhaps you could debate the topic of the thread - ie benefits.

I am asking if you have children and thus like many receive child benefits?

I do not receive any benefits.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


I am asking if you have children and thus like many receive child benefits?

I do not receive any benefits.

So you are saying you do not have children, or your children are now grown up or you earn more than 50k??

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I do not receive any benefits.

So you are saying you do not have children, or your children are now grown up or you earn more than 50k??

I don't talk about my private life on forums - sorry.

Anyway, child benefits are an interesting subject. I assume you mean what we used to call child allowance - the thing that everyone with children gets?

One could say that some people don't need it, and it should be reserved for those on a low income. However, in that case, it would once again amount to taking taxes from those who work hard and earn more and giving it to those who don't.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


So you are saying you do not have children, or your children are now grown up or you earn more than 50k??

I don't talk about my private life on forums - sorry.

Anyway, child benefits are an interesting subject. I assume you mean what we used to call child allowance - the thing that everyone with children gets?

One could say that some people don't need it, and it should be reserved for those on a low income. However, in that case, it would once again amount to taking taxes from those who work hard and earn more and giving it to those who don't.

I am not asking about your personal life far from it, I am talking about child allowance, with is benefits, people without children do not get this benefit do they?
Thus it is a benefit, hence they question to you, which is not being personal

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't talk about my private life on forums - sorry.

Anyway, child benefits are an interesting subject. I assume you mean what we used to call child allowance - the thing that everyone with children gets?

One could say that some people don't need it, and it should be reserved for those on a low income. However, in that case, it would once again amount to taking taxes from those who work hard and earn more and giving it to those who don't.

I am not asking about your personal life far from it, I am talking about child allowance, with is benefits, people without children do not get this benefit do they?
Thus it is a benefit, hence they question to you, which is not being personal

I would prefer to talk about it generally, which is what I just did. What is your opinion on the matter?