Essex Police Commissioner Nick Alston said more should have been done to identify arsonists who torched caravans on A127

Echo: Burnt-out shell – the caravans by the side of the A130 Burnt-out shell – the caravans by the side of the A130

ESSEX’s police commissioner has told the force it should have done more to identify arsonists who torched two caravans on the A130.

Nick Alston spoke out after the force revealed it did not consider it a criminal offence to set fire to the caravans, which contained potentially explosive gas canisters.

The vehicles, which were torched in a layby on the northbound section of the road, between Sadlers Farm and the A127, have caused even more concern as they have still not been moved more than two months after the first incident, on February 16.

They have attracted more flytipping and the second was set ablaze again.

An Essex Police spokesman said that as no owners had come forward to complain, and the location was not felt to pose a safety risk even though the road was closed on February 16, neither arson attack was recorded as a crime.

Mr Alston immediately raised the matter with Essex Police after a resident contacted him.

He said: “I note that Essex Fire and Rescue Service stated it was particularly dangerous to start deliberate fires by a busy road like this.

“On the facts as they are known, these caravan fires appear to involve irresponsible and reckless behaviour, and this needs to be dealt with.

“My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.”

When the Echo revealed details of the fires, the second of which happened at 10pm on February 28, Essex County Council and Basildon Council each said the other was responsibile for clearing the site, but that they would work to remove them.

Mr Alston was critical of the caravans still being there.

He said: “I regularly drive along that part of the A130.

“I am disappointed that, certainly as of a couple of days ago, the caravans and the related debris have not been cleared.

“I believe it is important relevant agencies, including Essex Police, work to find a quick solution for removing the caravans and the force considers options for pursuing those responsible.”

Kim Gandy, of Eastwood Road, Rayleigh, who wrote to Mr Alston, said: “The last time I drove past the mess was still not cleaned up. It looked like a whole pile of black sacks had also just been dumped, to add to the rolls of carpet and other junk.

“As it seems the police don’t think arson and criminal damage is an offence any more, perhaps they don’t think fly-tipping is either?”

Comments (122)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:57am Thu 24 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ???? carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -13

8:28am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

Being abandoned old and decrepit caravans, with zero traceability, without any sort of CCTV, what and how would it be in the interest of accountability, to even begin to think about an investigation.
Being abandoned old and decrepit caravans, with zero traceability, without any sort of CCTV, what and how would it be in the interest of accountability, to even begin to think about an investigation. sesibollox
  • Score: -12

9:24am Thu 24 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
Wrong...they where still there on the 8th april when i last went past.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????[/p][/quote]Wrong...they where still there on the 8th april when i last went past. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 15

9:24am Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal.
Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal. ThisYear
  • Score: -20

9:25am Thu 24 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

and good on Kim for persevering with it.
and good on Kim for persevering with it. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 21

9:45am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
3 weeks ago? are you sure?
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????[/p][/quote]3 weeks ago? are you sure? InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 25

10:02am Thu 24 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone? profondo asbo
  • Score: 12

10:08am Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that. ThisYear
  • Score: -21

10:09am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Like boats have to...
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Like boats have to... sesibollox
  • Score: 1

10:10am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
She probably proudly frames all the replies, sad as she is..
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]She probably proudly frames all the replies, sad as she is.. sesibollox
  • Score: -11

10:14am Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence" ThisYear
  • Score: -25

10:20am Thu 24 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

the uk you fool. clearly we have no control over US trailerparks
the uk you fool. clearly we have no control over US trailerparks profondo asbo
  • Score: 17

10:20am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof sesibollox
  • Score: -7

10:21am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

profondo asbo wrote:
the uk you fool. clearly we have no control over US trailerparks
Capital to start with, you foolpoof Lol
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: the uk you fool. clearly we have no control over US trailerparks[/p][/quote]Capital to start with, you foolpoof Lol sesibollox
  • Score: -9

10:24am Thu 24 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
here's an unfunny anagram of sesibollox -
nowthatsworthknowing

kjm gandy
carnmountification
carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
carnmountyouhavewayt
oomuchtimeonyourhand
sdesperateloser
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote]here's an unfunny anagram of sesibollox - nowthatsworthknowing kjm gandy carnmountification carnmountyouknowitma kessense carnmountyouhavewayt oomuchtimeonyourhand sdesperateloser profondo asbo
  • Score: 12

10:25am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn ......... InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 11

10:30am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote]. sesibollox
  • Score: -11

10:32am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!! InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 6

10:38am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one. sesibollox
  • Score: -7

10:41am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Here's a funny anagram of InTheKnowOk Went Ooh Kink
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram of InTheKnowOk Went Ooh Kink sesibollox
  • Score: -10

10:44am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!! InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 1

10:47am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Here's a funny anagram of InTheKnowOk Went Ooh Kink
To think you actually took the time to work that out actually cracks me up ..
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram of InTheKnowOk Went Ooh Kink[/p][/quote]To think you actually took the time to work that out actually cracks me up .. InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 3

10:47am Thu 24 Apr 14

sesibollox says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!![/p][/quote]Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past... sesibollox
  • Score: -6

10:49am Thu 24 Apr 14

Nowthatsworthknowing says...

sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...
Lol
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!![/p][/quote]Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...[/p][/quote]Lol Nowthatsworthknowing
  • Score: -5

10:55am Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...
You've seriously lost the plot .. Why don't you stop making yourself look a fool and get back to the topic in question before the thread gets taken down AGAIN because of your ridiculous comments about capital letters and anagrams ... It's pathetic and embarassing !!!!
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!![/p][/quote]Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...[/p][/quote]You've seriously lost the plot .. Why don't you stop making yourself look a fool and get back to the topic in question before the thread gets taken down AGAIN because of your ridiculous comments about capital letters and anagrams ... It's pathetic and embarassing !!!! InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 8

10:58am Thu 24 Apr 14

Nowthatsworthknowing says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...
You've seriously lost the plot .. Why don't you stop making yourself look a fool and get back to the topic in question before the thread gets taken down AGAIN because of your ridiculous comments about capital letters and anagrams ... It's pathetic and embarassing !!!!
You have two accounts, profondo asbo is your other poetic name here, equally dim, but you never was much of a bright spark...
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!![/p][/quote]Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...[/p][/quote]You've seriously lost the plot .. Why don't you stop making yourself look a fool and get back to the topic in question before the thread gets taken down AGAIN because of your ridiculous comments about capital letters and anagrams ... It's pathetic and embarassing !!!![/p][/quote]You have two accounts, profondo asbo is your other poetic name here, equally dim, but you never was much of a bright spark... Nowthatsworthknowing
  • Score: -8

10:59am Thu 24 Apr 14

Nowthatsworthknowing says...

sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
sesibollox wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof
.
You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!!
Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.
Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!!
Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...
lol
[quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sesibollox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram, of profondo asbo, Sad Boron Poof[/p][/quote].[/p][/quote]You are like a silly school kid, grow up !!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Thought you were in the know, if that's the case, learn an old Irish trick, before someone teaches you one.[/p][/quote]Says the dude with **** in his username LOL .. Class!![/p][/quote]Here's a better anagram of yours, Eh Kink No Wot, how apt, given your past...[/p][/quote]lol Nowthatsworthknowing
  • Score: -6

11:00am Thu 24 Apr 14

Sensible Man says...

The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid?

On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel).

And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something.

Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.
The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid? On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel). And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something. Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up. Sensible Man
  • Score: 11

11:01am Thu 24 Apr 14

Kim Gandy says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here.

They were removed LAST week.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????[/p][/quote]You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here. They were removed LAST week. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 4

11:02am Thu 24 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Sensible Man wrote:
The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid?

On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel).

And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something.

Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.
Heres a funny anagram of your name...Lesbians Men
[quote][p][bold]Sensible Man[/bold] wrote: The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid? On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel). And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something. Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.[/p][/quote]Heres a funny anagram of your name...Lesbians Men carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -9

11:08am Thu 24 Apr 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma

kessense
wrote:
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here.

They were removed LAST week.
Here's a funny anagram of KIM GANDY, Mangy Kid
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????[/p][/quote]You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here. They were removed LAST week.[/p][/quote]Here's a funny anagram of KIM GANDY, Mangy Kid carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -7

11:21am Thu 24 Apr 14

Kim Gandy says...

ThisYear wrote:
Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal.
Shut it moron. I am not old enough for dentures and I look a darn site better than you.

You are the biggest racist bigot around here. A self loathing slimeball with no social graces which is why you restrict yourself to posting under a pseudnym.

If you read other comments on here you would see I never use racist terminology however, you never did see the full contents of my letter to Alston which was as clear and honest as my writing always is.

And signed. With MY signature.

I have no problem expressing articulate opinions unlike your foamings at the mouth.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal.[/p][/quote]Shut it moron. I am not old enough for dentures and I look a darn site better than you. You are the biggest racist bigot around here. A self loathing slimeball with no social graces which is why you restrict yourself to posting under a pseudnym. If you read other comments on here you would see I never use racist terminology however, you never did see the full contents of my letter to Alston which was as clear and honest as my writing always is. And signed. With MY signature. I have no problem expressing articulate opinions unlike your foamings at the mouth. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 4

11:48am Thu 24 Apr 14

Kim Gandy says...

ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
Have you checked your own errors above?

You are hardly in a position to criticise others either. Your use of grammar and punctuation is quite appalling. I've spotted several errors..

As usual you CANNOT keep on topic; you are so full of bile and hatred for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian.

When are you going to understand that the only people on here who listen to your rubbish are your various alter egos under your different pseudonyms.

Everybody else thinks you're a nutter.

At least SOME people here agree with me - I certainly don't expect everybody to, that's healthy debate.

However, you and your moronic alter egos all spout off the same drivel, so you can hardly be taken seriously. And the minute the name calling and seething hatred starts, I know I have won the argument. You must be seriously annoyed I am quoted both on here and published in today's newspaper. Good.

You are seriously under informed, ill researched and out of touch and therefore you'd be better off just ranting to yourself in a dark corner.

And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds. You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]Have you checked your own errors above? You are hardly in a position to criticise others either. Your use of grammar and punctuation is quite appalling. I've spotted several errors.. As usual you CANNOT keep on topic; you are so full of bile and hatred for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian. When are you going to understand that the only people on here who listen to your rubbish are your various alter egos under your different pseudonyms. Everybody else thinks you're a nutter. At least SOME people here agree with me - I certainly don't expect everybody to, that's healthy debate. However, you and your moronic alter egos all spout off the same drivel, so you can hardly be taken seriously. And the minute the name calling and seething hatred starts, I know I have won the argument. You must be seriously annoyed I am quoted both on here and published in today's newspaper. Good. You are seriously under informed, ill researched and out of touch and therefore you'd be better off just ranting to yourself in a dark corner. And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds. You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 9

11:57am Thu 24 Apr 14

Kim Gandy says...

Sensible Man wrote:
The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid?

On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel).

And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something.

Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.
Hoorah for commonsense and I agree, This Year has a multiple personality disorder.

Trouble is, his personalities are all alike - and some are female. The female username is particularly vile and rancid. Obviously an identity crisis. And all from somebody who has never met me, my family or friends, or knows me personally.

And yes I agree. To commit an act like that on the public highway is an act of extreme indifference to the safety of others, not to mention stupidity. The carriageway had to be closed and of course, police, fire service and removal of said caravans all comes out of the public purse.

TY and his alter egos fail to understand, while they are ranting about other nonsensical cr@p, that all of this is coming out of their own pockets.

That's because leftwing liberals are too thick and brainwashed to see the wood for the trees.

Thanks also to dogsmess and others who have enough commonsense and gumption to stand up for what is right.

As for this idiot correcting others' postings and going into the usual predictable and ludicrous attacks and accusations, it says rather a lot more about him than it does about me - or anyone else he cares to foam at the mouth at.
[quote][p][bold]Sensible Man[/bold] wrote: The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid? On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel). And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something. Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.[/p][/quote]Hoorah for commonsense and I agree, This Year has a multiple personality disorder. Trouble is, his personalities are all alike - and some are female. The female username is particularly vile and rancid. Obviously an identity crisis. And all from somebody who has never met me, my family or friends, or knows me personally. And yes I agree. To commit an act like that on the public highway is an act of extreme indifference to the safety of others, not to mention stupidity. The carriageway had to be closed and of course, police, fire service and removal of said caravans all comes out of the public purse. TY and his alter egos fail to understand, while they are ranting about other nonsensical cr@p, that all of this is coming out of their own pockets. That's because leftwing liberals are too thick and brainwashed to see the wood for the trees. Thanks also to dogsmess and others who have enough commonsense and gumption to stand up for what is right. As for this idiot correcting others' postings and going into the usual predictable and ludicrous attacks and accusations, it says rather a lot more about him than it does about me - or anyone else he cares to foam at the mouth at. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 5

1:56pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn .........[/p][/quote]Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch.. ThisYear
  • Score: -10

2:03pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma

kessense
wrote:
Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????
You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here.

They were removed LAST week.
I bet you curtailed your apoplectic racial guff within the letter to him..couldn't have your real thoughts exposed could you?
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Wrong these caravans were removed three weeks ago, not very good with the facts are they ????[/p][/quote]You wouldn't know a fact from a hole in the ground. As you see, I have been on to this, getting things done rather than blabbering on here. They were removed LAST week.[/p][/quote]I bet you curtailed your apoplectic racial guff within the letter to him..couldn't have your real thoughts exposed could you? ThisYear
  • Score: -9

2:17pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal.
Shut it moron. I am not old enough for dentures and I look a darn site better than you.

You are the biggest racist bigot around here. A self loathing slimeball with no social graces which is why you restrict yourself to posting under a pseudnym.

If you read other comments on here you would see I never use racist terminology however, you never did see the full contents of my letter to Alston which was as clear and honest as my writing always is.

And signed. With MY signature.

I have no problem expressing articulate opinions unlike your foamings at the mouth.
Gandy of there is any raging idiot on here it is definitely you...your posts scream 'issues issues issues '

Iv seen your pictures, perhaps your dentures fall out of your mouth as you speak as you seem to fall out of your dress when your picture is taken..

You couldn't possibly know if you look better than me, you have never seen me.

Can you explain how I am a racist bigot or is this just more of your 'issues'

Os it true you take part in a 'apartheid' type of withdrawing of children from school because of Traveller children accessing the school...?

Did this lead to you leaving your post as a school governor?

And just what is a 'non-political' councillor?

Why are you reluctant to reply to that question while reminding everyone at every juncture that you were 'in office'

"unlike your foamings (sic) at the mouth"

To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Irony thy name is Gandy'
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Gandy kept her ranting and racial connotations under strict control (unless the paper censored her comments) She must of worn down her gums gnashing her dentures to keep her comments legal.[/p][/quote]Shut it moron. I am not old enough for dentures and I look a darn site better than you. You are the biggest racist bigot around here. A self loathing slimeball with no social graces which is why you restrict yourself to posting under a pseudnym. If you read other comments on here you would see I never use racist terminology however, you never did see the full contents of my letter to Alston which was as clear and honest as my writing always is. And signed. With MY signature. I have no problem expressing articulate opinions unlike your foamings at the mouth.[/p][/quote]Gandy of there is any raging idiot on here it is definitely you...your posts scream 'issues issues issues ' Iv seen your pictures, perhaps your dentures fall out of your mouth as you speak as you seem to fall out of your dress when your picture is taken.. You couldn't possibly know if you look better than me, you have never seen me. Can you explain how I am a racist bigot or is this just more of your 'issues' Os it true you take part in a 'apartheid' type of withdrawing of children from school because of Traveller children accessing the school...? Did this lead to you leaving your post as a school governor? And just what is a 'non-political' councillor? Why are you reluctant to reply to that question while reminding everyone at every juncture that you were 'in office' "unlike your foamings (sic) at the mouth" To paraphrase Shakespeare: 'Irony thy name is Gandy' ThisYear
  • Score: -13

2:26pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
Have you checked your own errors above?

You are hardly in a position to criticise others either. Your use of grammar and punctuation is quite appalling. I've spotted several errors..

As usual you CANNOT keep on topic; you are so full of bile and hatred for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian.

When are you going to understand that the only people on here who listen to your rubbish are your various alter egos under your different pseudonyms.

Everybody else thinks you're a nutter.

At least SOME people here agree with me - I certainly don't expect everybody to, that's healthy debate.

However, you and your moronic alter egos all spout off the same drivel, so you can hardly be taken seriously. And the minute the name calling and seething hatred starts, I know I have won the argument. You must be seriously annoyed I am quoted both on here and published in today's newspaper. Good.

You are seriously under informed, ill researched and out of touch and therefore you'd be better off just ranting to yourself in a dark corner.

And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds. You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic.
Please point out the errors..I am always happy to learn by my mistakes..

" for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian" that would be you then Gandy..withdraw children from school because of children from another culture are attending it...and you speak of morals?

When are YOU going to understand that I have but one user name on here...People know that tactic Gandy...shows how much you are scalded by my questions and information that you have to revert to such spin.

Read a bit of Gandi Gandy and see what he says about being "even a minority of one" It might educate you a little bit..

Without a doubt you are the forum ranter as most here will attest to if they were being honest.

"And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds"

You have been told before, we are all not as lucky as you as to have a 'care in the community' worker helping out..

"You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic"

"Gandy thy name is irony"
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]Have you checked your own errors above? You are hardly in a position to criticise others either. Your use of grammar and punctuation is quite appalling. I've spotted several errors.. As usual you CANNOT keep on topic; you are so full of bile and hatred for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian. When are you going to understand that the only people on here who listen to your rubbish are your various alter egos under your different pseudonyms. Everybody else thinks you're a nutter. At least SOME people here agree with me - I certainly don't expect everybody to, that's healthy debate. However, you and your moronic alter egos all spout off the same drivel, so you can hardly be taken seriously. And the minute the name calling and seething hatred starts, I know I have won the argument. You must be seriously annoyed I am quoted both on here and published in today's newspaper. Good. You are seriously under informed, ill researched and out of touch and therefore you'd be better off just ranting to yourself in a dark corner. And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds. You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic.[/p][/quote]Please point out the errors..I am always happy to learn by my mistakes.. " for somebody who is a self appointed moral guardian" that would be you then Gandy..withdraw children from school because of children from another culture are attending it...and you speak of morals? When are YOU going to understand that I have but one user name on here...People know that tactic Gandy...shows how much you are scalded by my questions and information that you have to revert to such spin. Read a bit of Gandi Gandy and see what he says about being "even a minority of one" It might educate you a little bit.. Without a doubt you are the forum ranter as most here will attest to if they were being honest. "And while you're at it, phone matron and ask her to change your meds" You have been told before, we are all not as lucky as you as to have a 'care in the community' worker helping out.. "You are seriously paranoid and quite possibly psychotic" "Gandy thy name is irony" ThisYear
  • Score: -10

3:01pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
Sensible Man wrote:
The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid?

On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel).

And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something.

Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.
Hoorah for commonsense and I agree, This Year has a multiple personality disorder.

Trouble is, his personalities are all alike - and some are female. The female username is particularly vile and rancid. Obviously an identity crisis. And all from somebody who has never met me, my family or friends, or knows me personally.

And yes I agree. To commit an act like that on the public highway is an act of extreme indifference to the safety of others, not to mention stupidity. The carriageway had to be closed and of course, police, fire service and removal of said caravans all comes out of the public purse.

TY and his alter egos fail to understand, while they are ranting about other nonsensical cr@p, that all of this is coming out of their own pockets.

That's because leftwing liberals are too thick and brainwashed to see the wood for the trees.

Thanks also to dogsmess and others who have enough commonsense and gumption to stand up for what is right.

As for this idiot correcting others' postings and going into the usual predictable and ludicrous attacks and accusations, it says rather a lot more about him than it does about me - or anyone else he cares to foam at the mouth at.
Gandy..You seem to think only one person on this forum disapproves of you and so all the others who do must be alter egos of this one person..that is the paranoia you speak of.

The female poster (who doesn't seem to have posted recently) obviously dislikes you immensely and I can't say I can blame her..Most women have a natural fondness for children regardless of whose they are..and this poster most be sickened to know you were part of a withdrawal of children from a school because little Traveller children attended the same school...no wonder she finds you abominable! As should any decent person with morals.

I have read enough about you on the internet and your posts on here to make a pretty accurate assumption of what sort of a person you are!

The 'apartheid' action is enough I'd say!

You are truly a disgusting individual
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sensible Man[/bold] wrote: The main question is - what sort of IDIOT would set fire to a caravan containing potentially explosive gas canisters? Are they completely insane or just stupid? On a secondary note - the number of multiple IDs used by one poster on here is getting ridiculous. You can usually spot him / her as they have absolutely no idea when / how to use commas and just sprinkle them about randomly in their sentences. (Also they normally spout left-wing liberal drivel). And well done to Kim Gandy - unlike the aforementioned comma-lover she actually got up and DID something. Hopefully one day the appalling person / people who set these caravans alight will be caught and punished. It would be great if they could come on here and explain their rationale for carrying out an act of such total stupidity. Definitely a hate crime - hate against the road users who could have been injured / killed had the gas canisters blown up.[/p][/quote]Hoorah for commonsense and I agree, This Year has a multiple personality disorder. Trouble is, his personalities are all alike - and some are female. The female username is particularly vile and rancid. Obviously an identity crisis. And all from somebody who has never met me, my family or friends, or knows me personally. And yes I agree. To commit an act like that on the public highway is an act of extreme indifference to the safety of others, not to mention stupidity. The carriageway had to be closed and of course, police, fire service and removal of said caravans all comes out of the public purse. TY and his alter egos fail to understand, while they are ranting about other nonsensical cr@p, that all of this is coming out of their own pockets. That's because leftwing liberals are too thick and brainwashed to see the wood for the trees. Thanks also to dogsmess and others who have enough commonsense and gumption to stand up for what is right. As for this idiot correcting others' postings and going into the usual predictable and ludicrous attacks and accusations, it says rather a lot more about him than it does about me - or anyone else he cares to foam at the mouth at.[/p][/quote]Gandy..You seem to think only one person on this forum disapproves of you and so all the others who do must be alter egos of this one person..that is the paranoia you speak of. The female poster (who doesn't seem to have posted recently) obviously dislikes you immensely and I can't say I can blame her..Most women have a natural fondness for children regardless of whose they are..and this poster most be sickened to know you were part of a withdrawal of children from a school because little Traveller children attended the same school...no wonder she finds you abominable! As should any decent person with morals. I have read enough about you on the internet and your posts on here to make a pretty accurate assumption of what sort of a person you are! The 'apartheid' action is enough I'd say! You are truly a disgusting individual ThisYear
  • Score: -9

3:10pm Thu 24 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 13

3:23pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Sensible Man says...

This Year - Just for ONCE - can you desist from making offensive personal attacks and comment on the substance of the story - i.e this hate crime? Would you not like to see the perpetrators of this hate crime brought to justice? What do you think of people who hate their fellow men and women so much that they set fire to caravans containing potentially explosive gas canisters on the public highway?
This Year - Just for ONCE - can you desist from making offensive personal attacks and comment on the substance of the story - i.e this hate crime? Would you not like to see the perpetrators of this hate crime brought to justice? What do you think of people who hate their fellow men and women so much that they set fire to caravans containing potentially explosive gas canisters on the public highway? Sensible Man
  • Score: 10

3:55pm Thu 24 Apr 14

stopmoaning1 says...

Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote;
“My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.”
He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge.

If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim)
If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime.
So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime.

So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.
Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote; “My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.” He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge. If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim) If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime. So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime. So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit. stopmoaning1
  • Score: 5

6:42pm Thu 24 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..
No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here ..

Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn .........[/p][/quote]Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..[/p][/quote]No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here .. Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. .. InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 9

6:45pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Idontknowy says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote;
“My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.”
He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge.

If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim)
If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime.
So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime.

So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.
And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming????
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote; “My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.” He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge. If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim) If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime. So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime. So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.[/p][/quote]And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming???? Idontknowy
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Thu 24 Apr 14

the25man says...

I wonder if the Police would bother looking into taking my old furniture and burning it in a lay bye. By setting fire to it wouldn't be fly tipping or so it seems.
I wonder if the Police would bother looking into taking my old furniture and burning it in a lay bye. By setting fire to it wouldn't be fly tipping or so it seems. the25man
  • Score: 0

11:48pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic
.

Down to her what has come to light?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light? ThisYear
  • Score: -8

11:53pm Thu 24 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Sensible Man wrote:
This Year - Just for ONCE - can you desist from making offensive personal attacks and comment on the substance of the story - i.e this hate crime? Would you not like to see the perpetrators of this hate crime brought to justice? What do you think of people who hate their fellow men and women so much that they set fire to caravans containing potentially explosive gas canisters on the public highway?
Go way you dope...dont ask me to do something you would not ask Gandy or her like to do..

How ridiculous.."hate crime"

By your demented logic all crime would be deemed a hate crime..

The police seem to think there was no crime committed...so how can it be a 'hate crime"

Idiot
[quote][p][bold]Sensible Man[/bold] wrote: This Year - Just for ONCE - can you desist from making offensive personal attacks and comment on the substance of the story - i.e this hate crime? Would you not like to see the perpetrators of this hate crime brought to justice? What do you think of people who hate their fellow men and women so much that they set fire to caravans containing potentially explosive gas canisters on the public highway?[/p][/quote]Go way you dope...dont ask me to do something you would not ask Gandy or her like to do.. How ridiculous.."hate crime" By your demented logic all crime would be deemed a hate crime.. The police seem to think there was no crime committed...so how can it be a 'hate crime" Idiot ThisYear
  • Score: -11

12:07am Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..
No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here ..

Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..
Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok.

Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit.
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn .........[/p][/quote]Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..[/p][/quote]No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here .. Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..[/p][/quote]Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok. Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit. ThisYear
  • Score: -12

12:08am Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Idontknowy wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote;
“My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.”
He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge.

If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim)
If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime.
So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime.

So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.
And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming????
IF..
[quote][p][bold]Idontknowy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote; “My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.” He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge. If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim) If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime. So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime. So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.[/p][/quote]And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming????[/p][/quote]IF.. ThisYear
  • Score: -6

12:09am Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

the25man wrote:
I wonder if the Police would bother looking into taking my old furniture and burning it in a lay bye. By setting fire to it wouldn't be fly tipping or so it seems.
Try it and keep us updated.
[quote][p][bold]the25man[/bold] wrote: I wonder if the Police would bother looking into taking my old furniture and burning it in a lay bye. By setting fire to it wouldn't be fly tipping or so it seems.[/p][/quote]Try it and keep us updated. ThisYear
  • Score: -11

9:32am Fri 25 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic

.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 2

9:43am Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic


.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county? ThisYear
  • Score: -9

10:50am Fri 25 Apr 14

stopmoaning1 says...

Idontknowy wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote;
“My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.”
He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge.

If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim)
If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime.
So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime.

So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.
And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming????
Well that's the thing you see. The legal definition of an accident for the road traffic act starts with the words 'if owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road, damage is caused........goes on to mention injury.
So you will see that if fumes caused a 'multiple pile up' the 'accident claim' would not stem from the caravan. (I'd probably question why somebody drove into such dense smoke to the point they couldn't see and had an accident if in the real world actually did happen as we don't usually deal with 'what if it 'had of' happened')

And please don't think I'm condoning any actions of those who set fire to the caravans as it really was stupid.
But, you see, there are a lot of people on this forum who just don't understand a very simple part of this story. Just because something is dangerous doesn't make it a criminal offence.
[quote][p][bold]Idontknowy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: Well I'm not sure what anybody was hoping to achieve by writing to the PCC regarding this - apart maybe from 15 minutes of fame, he does not make the law! Look at his own quote; “My inquires of Essex Police have shown there is a surprising complexity around potential offences and responsibility, but my own judgment is that greater efforts should have been made to remove the caravans and identify those responsible.” He is not a police officer and clearly by the quote, has no legal knowledge. If one of my clients set fire to their own vehicle, that would not be a crime (unless of course it was with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim) If they set fire to somebody else's vehicle, that would be a crime. So, as nobody has come forward to claim ownership and report the crime, the logical assumption is that they were set alight by their owners, and if you're keeping up remember, will not be a crime. So some black sacks have been left there now. Is fly tipping a criminal offence? I don't know, but even so, (and I'm not saying it's right) how much of our valuable police's time do you want spent on looking for people who dumb bags of rubbish in a lay by when this forum is always screaming about the fact it takes them over a day sometimes to manage to get to a burglary. In my business (motor insurance) some of my clients don't even get a visit.[/p][/quote]And if the fumes and smoke from these burning caravans had caused a multiple pile-up and possibly fatality who would your motor insurance company be blaming????[/p][/quote]Well that's the thing you see. The legal definition of an accident for the road traffic act starts with the words 'if owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road, damage is caused........goes on to mention injury. So you will see that if fumes caused a 'multiple pile up' the 'accident claim' would not stem from the caravan. (I'd probably question why somebody drove into such dense smoke to the point they couldn't see and had an accident if in the real world actually did happen as we don't usually deal with 'what if it 'had of' happened') And please don't think I'm condoning any actions of those who set fire to the caravans as it really was stupid. But, you see, there are a lot of people on this forum who just don't understand a very simple part of this story. Just because something is dangerous doesn't make it a criminal offence. stopmoaning1
  • Score: 4

10:53am Fri 25 Apr 14

stopmoaning1 says...

Mr Alston should stick to his job and ensure the police budget allows officers to do their jobs as efficiently as possible and keep his nose out of the day to day investigations.
Mr Alston should stick to his job and ensure the police budget allows officers to do their jobs as efficiently as possible and keep his nose out of the day to day investigations. stopmoaning1
  • Score: 5

11:29am Fri 25 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic



.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 7

4:14pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
.....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote].....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers. Alekhine
  • Score: 0

4:14pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

Alekhine wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
.....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.
....and well done Kim.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote].....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.[/p][/quote]....and well done Kim. Alekhine
  • Score: 2

4:20pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Alekhine
  • Score: -2

4:55pm Fri 25 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

Alekhine wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
.....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.
goodbye national debt, hello jim henson
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote].....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.[/p][/quote]goodbye national debt, hello jim henson profondo asbo
  • Score: 3

11:23pm Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic




.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term. ThisYear
  • Score: -2

11:25pm Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
.....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.
Back from under the rock after your last 'kicking' by me..and off we go again...
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote].....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.[/p][/quote]Back from under the rock after your last 'kicking' by me..and off we go again... ThisYear
  • Score: -5

11:30pm Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/p][/quote]Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

11:31pm Fri 25 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
.....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.
goodbye national debt, hello jim henson
'got' old clapped out computer with broken capital lock.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote].....and a whip round to make sure the enquiry is done properly. This Year and the rest of the cast of the muppet show will be very effective fund raisers.[/p][/quote]goodbye national debt, hello jim henson[/p][/quote]'got' old clapped out computer with broken capital lock. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

1:12am Sat 26 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.
You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid?

No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear.

I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/p][/quote]Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.[/p][/quote]You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid? No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear. I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous? Alekhine
  • Score: 4

8:25am Sat 26 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic





.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 3

9:44am Sat 26 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.
You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid?

No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear.

I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?
There has been no suggestion by the experts in matter that this was a 'potentially fatal traffic hazard'

And your term; has been rather over done hasn't it?

Im sure all potentially fatal incidents are hazardous, and goes without saying DER.....

If picking you up on your many faux pas' is considered entertainment then I will continue to entertain; just as long as you remain posting your stupid and puerile comments.

Oh dear, you really are running the gauntlet of idiocy..first it was mocking your own intelligence by your lack of originality and now we are in the pedantic stage of your desperation...next it will be the 'nar nar nar nar nar' stage you succumb to just before you flee the thread.

Im sure Mr Righteous is aware of Mr Infer and Mr Imply..are you now educated on the difference between them..Oh how we laughed at your "you implied that I inferred"

In fact: HAHAHAHAHAHA deep breath HAHAHAHAHA

The owner of the property has never been identified. They looked like caravans for agricultural use...on top of that there is no evidence that the owner dumped them much less that he/she set them a lit..

Should they be removed...yes indeed, Im sure no one is arguing against that...unless your into contemporary art...and Id dare say your not.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/p][/quote]Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.[/p][/quote]You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid? No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear. I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?[/p][/quote]There has been no suggestion by the experts in matter that this was a 'potentially fatal traffic hazard' And your term; has been rather over done hasn't it? Im sure all potentially fatal incidents are hazardous, and goes without saying DER..... If picking you up on your many faux pas' is considered entertainment then I will continue to entertain; just as long as you remain posting your stupid and puerile comments. Oh dear, you really are running the gauntlet of idiocy..first it was mocking your own intelligence by your lack of originality and now we are in the pedantic stage of your desperation...next it will be the 'nar nar nar nar nar' stage you succumb to just before you flee the thread. Im sure Mr Righteous is aware of Mr Infer and Mr Imply..are you now educated on the difference between them..Oh how we laughed at your "you implied that I inferred" In fact: HAHAHAHAHAHA deep breath HAHAHAHAHA The owner of the property has never been identified. They looked like caravans for agricultural use...on top of that there is no evidence that the owner dumped them much less that he/she set them a lit.. Should they be removed...yes indeed, Im sure no one is arguing against that...unless your into contemporary art...and Id dare say your not. ThisYear
  • Score: -7

9:49am Sat 26 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.
You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid?

No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear.

I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?
he disappeared and for that we should be thankful.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/p][/quote]Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.[/p][/quote]You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid? No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear. I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?[/p][/quote]he disappeared and for that we should be thankful. profondo asbo
  • Score: 0

9:51am Sat 26 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic






.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you? ThisYear
  • Score: -6

9:53am Sat 26 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note.

HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.
You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid?

No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear.

I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?
he disappeared and for that we should be thankful.
'got' old clapped out computer with broken capital lock.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: I do not have a dossier so this string will have to go in a picture frame. On a more personal note. HAHAHAHAHA DEEP BREATH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/p][/quote]Oh dear...sees you have now deteriorated to the point you dont even try to be original...slither off...you know Im only going to make you look stupid, as per.[/p][/quote]You are are arguing against an investigation into a potentially fatal traffic hazard on a busy road and you think i look stupid? No doubt that was not the Lastlaugh that you will be providing. I hope you will be entertaining us well into next year ThisYear. I wonder what happened to Rightous Man, did he get over his insomnia and learn how to spell righteous?[/p][/quote]he disappeared and for that we should be thankful.[/p][/quote]'got' old clapped out computer with broken capital lock. ThisYear
  • Score: -7

10:15am Sat 26 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic







.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way.
Ta Ta.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you?[/p][/quote]You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way. Ta Ta. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 1

5:21pm Sat 26 Apr 14

VeteranOfMany says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic








.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way.
Ta Ta.
Now that's a little rich coming from you, mess....
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you?[/p][/quote]You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way. Ta Ta.[/p][/quote]Now that's a little rich coming from you, mess.... VeteranOfMany
  • Score: -7

7:26pm Sat 26 Apr 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense. blackheart
  • Score: 2

10:44pm Sat 26 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote.. ThisYear
  • Score: -5

10:48pm Sat 26 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic








.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way.
Ta Ta.
Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again
"do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you?[/p][/quote]You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way. Ta Ta.[/p][/quote]Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again "do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?" ThisYear
  • Score: -1

11:50pm Sat 26 Apr 14

InTheKnowOk says...

ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..
No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here ..

Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..
Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok.

Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit.
'Simple Simon' .... That's rich coming from the biggest fool of them all who sits here all day making up anagrams of other people's usernames whilst signing in and out with multiple passwords and email addresses ...

'Kim Gandy' .... I haven't seen her bringing you into a thread, maybe she has? maybe she was getting her own back at your constant barrage ..

'Special brew is over done a bit' ??? ... I can't answer that as I don't understand what you mean ..
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn .........[/p][/quote]Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..[/p][/quote]No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here .. Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..[/p][/quote]Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok. Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit.[/p][/quote]'Simple Simon' .... That's rich coming from the biggest fool of them all who sits here all day making up anagrams of other people's usernames whilst signing in and out with multiple passwords and email addresses ... 'Kim Gandy' .... I haven't seen her bringing you into a thread, maybe she has? maybe she was getting her own back at your constant barrage .. 'Special brew is over done a bit' ??? ... I can't answer that as I don't understand what you mean .. InTheKnowOk
  • Score: 0

12:11am Sun 27 Apr 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie. blackheart
  • Score: 1

9:03am Sun 27 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic









.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way.
Ta Ta.
Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again
"do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"
There is nothing to answer,your persistence in constantly sniffing around me is now blatantly obvious once again.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you?[/p][/quote]You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way. Ta Ta.[/p][/quote]Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again "do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"[/p][/quote]There is nothing to answer,your persistence in constantly sniffing around me is now blatantly obvious once again. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 0

9:44am Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
InTheKnowOk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
Yawn .........
Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..
No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here ..

Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..
Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok.

Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit.
'Simple Simon' .... That's rich coming from the biggest fool of them all who sits here all day making up anagrams of other people's usernames whilst signing in and out with multiple passwords and email addresses ...

'Kim Gandy' .... I haven't seen her bringing you into a thread, maybe she has? maybe she was getting her own back at your constant barrage ..

'Special brew is over done a bit' ??? ... I can't answer that as I don't understand what you mean ..
I'm sure I haven't at any stage made any anagrams of others usernames...my style of writing should now be very recognisable from others but probably wouldn't be to a 'Simple Simon'

I have merely one username...agin a concept that seems to be way beyond your mental capability to comprehend.

Gandy denigrates a whole community with her rants and is therefore open to challenge. Racial stereotyping is the 'refuge of scoundrels'

So what you dont see hasn't happened..whatever (as they say)

Now pop off and concern yourself with your posts rather than mine.
[quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InTheKnowOk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]Yawn .........[/p][/quote]Just after 10am and you're tired..but then you've probably been up since 9.30...have a swig of special brew and a nice kip on the couch..[/p][/quote]No, no, no, and no .. Be the day when you get something right on here .. Now explain why you felt the need to bring Kim Gandy into the 'Bouncer' story as It's looking like you are a tad obsessed with the woman by the amount of times you bring her name into practically every thread .. ..[/p][/quote]Dont tell me what to do simple simon..ok. Strange how you never notice her mentioning of me in her posts..perhaps the special brew is over done a bit.[/p][/quote]'Simple Simon' .... That's rich coming from the biggest fool of them all who sits here all day making up anagrams of other people's usernames whilst signing in and out with multiple passwords and email addresses ... 'Kim Gandy' .... I haven't seen her bringing you into a thread, maybe she has? maybe she was getting her own back at your constant barrage .. 'Special brew is over done a bit' ??? ... I can't answer that as I don't understand what you mean ..[/p][/quote]I'm sure I haven't at any stage made any anagrams of others usernames...my style of writing should now be very recognisable from others but probably wouldn't be to a 'Simple Simon' I have merely one username...agin a concept that seems to be way beyond your mental capability to comprehend. Gandy denigrates a whole community with her rants and is therefore open to challenge. Racial stereotyping is the 'refuge of scoundrels' So what you dont see hasn't happened..whatever (as they say) Now pop off and concern yourself with your posts rather than mine. ThisYear
  • Score: -5

9:46am Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense?

Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense" ThisYear
  • Score: -4

9:49am Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
and good on Kim for persevering with it.
Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.
No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.
There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot.

She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic










.

Down to her what has come to light?
Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.
Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real?

Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your....

*They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring*

As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed.

That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say.

I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck

BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?
Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates),

RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.
Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that..

I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you?

The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on..

I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.
'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.
I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck..


I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you..

Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?

You are rather fragile aren't you?
You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way.
Ta Ta.
Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again
"do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"
There is nothing to answer,your persistence in constantly sniffing around me is now blatantly obvious once again.
The question was; "do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"

When (if sensibly) answering that you will of undermined your own claims..

"They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring"
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: and good on Kim for persevering with it.[/p][/quote]Yes indeed, especially when you think of all the other more important things in life she may have to contend with...she seems to be always looking for 'office' of some type..perhaps we can start a campaign to have her elected as the head of the 'curtain twitchers' ...she will have to tone down her prejudices though and curtain twitch for all aspects of society..How about we term the office 'The Grand Curtain Twitcher' She'd like that.[/p][/quote]No, she sounds like someone who speaks out and goes just that extra bit further than most and this is the perfect example, of course people like you will bring the race card in you always do as thats the only argument you have..you are a very limited person, what are the chances of this story not appearing if Kim Gandy had not got onto Nick Alston a few weeks back when she said she was going to in a post on here.....i would say it was down to her in part that this has come to light.[/p][/quote]There is no such thing as 'the race card'...its a myth bigfoot. She wrote to a man she is always calling names, about a incident that happened sometime ago and you are peeing yourself with admiration..pathetic . Down to her what has come to light?[/p][/quote]Ohh no,I thought I had shaken you off, now you are sliding back into stalking mode, whats it like being the most disliked poster on here then ThisLastYearLaugh.? its hard to imagine being that unpopular.[/p][/quote]Oh dear oh lor...you post some ridiculous points directed at me and when I reply to them you accuse me of stalking you! Are you for real? Going by your own logic; wouldn't the fact you commented on my post first suggest it is you 'stalking' me rather than the other way around. Perhaps you feel you should be able to comment on my posts but I shouldn't be able to comment or reply to your.... *They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring* As for 'popular' It is clear you are on of those 'celeb' obsessed idiots worrying about popularity..get a backbone ans stand on your own two feet...you dont need praise to be your own man, little dripweed. That seems to be the mentality of the majority of the posters on this right-wing forum..I wonder how many NF/BNP/EDL/BF post on here or those who have sympathy with said do. A fair few I would say. I reserve the right to challenge your puerile remarks directed to me and your obsession with dog-muck BTW do you have a photo album of all the dog muck you have located about the county?[/p][/quote]Ha, ok heres one for you Mr Un-popular(Billy No Mates), RE: your line about me commenting on YOUR post first....just go back to the start of the comments (10.08am Thursday to make it easy for you, your post with 16 thumbs down as per norm), it was Yourself that commented on MY comment first and not me chasing YOU..belle-end, i knew you would slip up sooner or later..you just showed yourself up once again..so YES my logic(as you put it) is correct if you like, you are starting to stalk me again and try to use chat about Dogs S**t as a way of throwing something back thinking it would get at me but fail miserably, you had a few weeks break but seems you couldn't resist, and if you don't like this forum or posters then you are free to go elsewhere., so please do, or have you been everywhere else and got the same reception as you have here., sounds about right.[/p][/quote]Dogsmuck..I have many friends..a whole community of them..so dont worry yourself about that.. I was not referring to who posted first on here but in regards to the issue I commented on and to which you replied..if you posted about something and I replied to it and then I posted something and you replied to it how on earth can it be deemed Im stalking an old muck-sniffer like you? The point is if you and others dont like my posts then YOU can float on.. I like to challenge the Neanderthals on right-wing forums...it amuse me to see how they 'laager up' when confronted with the stupidity of their racism..get used to me Im here for the long term.[/p][/quote]'The issue you commented on'...? the village idiot strikes again you are confusing yourself,as per...you read back as i pointed you in the correct direction and realised you messed up as you do, and have taken some considerable time to figure out how to squirm out of it...but failed miserably once again.[/p][/quote]I love to keep you scrolling back and busy dogsmuck.. I replied to your 'hopeful' comment to Ga-Ga..and elaborated on her curtain twitchiness and mentioned her continuous denigrating of Mr Alston on other threads and you decide from that that I am stalking you.. Again I ask; do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? You are rather fragile aren't you?[/p][/quote]You have issues, and i dare say you want this thread deleted just like all the others you don't like normal people posting on, keep going and i am sure soon enough you will get your selfish 'cry like a baby' way. Ta Ta.[/p][/quote]Still no answer to the question asked..here lets try again "do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?"[/p][/quote]There is nothing to answer,your persistence in constantly sniffing around me is now blatantly obvious once again.[/p][/quote]The question was; "do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?" When (if sensibly) answering that you will of undermined your own claims.. "They dont like it up them Mr Mainwaring" ThisYear
  • Score: -5

10:24am Sun 27 Apr 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense?

Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left. blackheart
  • Score: 9

4:28pm Sun 27 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense?

Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 14

8:02pm Sun 27 Apr 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

waste of time trying to get through to ThisLastYear..he is thick as 2 short planks and wired up wrong.
waste of time trying to get through to ThisLastYear..he is thick as 2 short planks and wired up wrong. DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 7

9:03pm Sun 27 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA.
Also, "the world is a sphere!" is indeed utter nonsense. Do you ever look into something before claiming it as a fact?
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA.[/p][/quote]Also, "the world is a sphere!" is indeed utter nonsense. Do you ever look into something before claiming it as a fact? Chris Flunk
  • Score: 6

10:29pm Sun 27 Apr 14

profondo asbo says...

got trailerpark stats?
got jim henson?
got trailerpark stats? got jim henson? profondo asbo
  • Score: 4

11:20pm Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
got trailerpark stats?
got jim henson?
"got" no capital letters?
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?[/p][/quote]"got" no capital letters? ThisYear
  • Score: -7

11:22pm Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA.
Also, "the world is a sphere!" is indeed utter nonsense. Do you ever look into something before claiming it as a fact?
What have I claimed is a fact?
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]I just did some quick research. I looked at the latest American Housing Survey published by the United States Census Bureau. According to that, Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA.[/p][/quote]Also, "the world is a sphere!" is indeed utter nonsense. Do you ever look into something before claiming it as a fact?[/p][/quote]What have I claimed is a fact? ThisYear
  • Score: -6

11:27pm Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
waste of time trying to get through to ThisLastYear..he is thick as 2 short planks and wired up wrong.
Of course I am.....but as it clear Im more intelligent than you what does that make you?

And still you haven't answered the question; lets try again. Do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: waste of time trying to get through to ThisLastYear..he is thick as 2 short planks and wired up wrong.[/p][/quote]Of course I am.....but as it clear Im more intelligent than you what does that make you? And still you haven't answered the question; lets try again. Do you feel someone challenging, commenting or replying on/to one of your post is 'stalking' ? ThisYear
  • Score: -5

11:32pm Sun 27 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices?

WOW

No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes)

Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother"

"We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments"

Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense?

Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people?

Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so.. ThisYear
  • Score: -7

12:00am Mon 28 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments".

Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers.

These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person.

Do you stand by this assertion?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion? Chris Flunk
  • Score: 16

12:28am Mon 28 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

From the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/magazine-24135
022

"Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million."

If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees? Chris Flunk
  • Score: 12

9:48am Mon 28 Apr 14

Nebs says...

Well done Kim.
Well done Kim. Nebs
  • Score: 8

12:21pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?
"got" no capital letters?
Got denial
Got a light?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?[/p][/quote]"got" no capital letters?[/p][/quote]Got denial Got a light? Alekhine
  • Score: 4

1:28am Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments".

Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers.

These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person.

Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans.

Link to your source if you please.
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

1:29am Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
From the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/magazine-24135

022

"Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million."

If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms? ThisYear
  • Score: -4

1:30am Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?
"got" no capital letters?
Got denial
Got a light?
Got ignorance of the difference between implied and inferred
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?[/p][/quote]"got" no capital letters?[/p][/quote]Got denial Got a light?[/p][/quote]Got ignorance of the difference between implied and inferred ThisYear
  • Score: -3

8:57am Tue 29 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?
"got" no capital letters?
Got denial Got a light?
Got ignorance of the difference between implied and inferred
Got an answer to Chris Flunk's question?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: got trailerpark stats? got jim henson?[/p][/quote]"got" no capital letters?[/p][/quote]Got denial Got a light?[/p][/quote]Got ignorance of the difference between implied and inferred[/p][/quote]Got an answer to Chris Flunk's question? Alekhine
  • Score: 1

9:13am Tue 29 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 0

9:20am Tue 29 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments"

The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower.

As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website:

http://www.census.go
v/programs-surveys/a
hs/

The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 4

9:31am Tue 29 Apr 14

cg1blue says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it....

Man up and admit when you're wrong!
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong! cg1blue
  • Score: 4

10:29am Tue 29 Apr 14

blackheart says...

Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time. blackheart
  • Score: 5

1:37pm Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households' ThisYear
  • Score: -5

1:42pm Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments"

The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower.

As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website:

http://www.census.go

v/programs-surveys/a

hs/

The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied)

Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms?

The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws
.

The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.[/p][/quote]I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC? ThisYear
  • Score: -7

1:44pm Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

cg1blue wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it....

Man up and admit when you're wrong!
I stand by my assertion.

The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people.
[quote][p][bold]cg1blue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong![/p][/quote]I stand by my assertion. The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people. ThisYear
  • Score: -9

1:46pm Tue 29 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card. ThisYear
  • Score: -8

2:06pm Tue 29 Apr 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Really??
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.[/p][/quote]You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Really?? blackheart
  • Score: 2

2:07pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
cg1blue wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong!
I stand by my assertion. The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people.
You just cannot admit that you are wrong, can you. Obviously it must be the US Census Bureau and the BBC that are wrong, not you.

It's quite embarrassing really.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cg1blue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong![/p][/quote]I stand by my assertion. The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people.[/p][/quote]You just cannot admit that you are wrong, can you. Obviously it must be the US Census Bureau and the BBC that are wrong, not you. It's quite embarrassing really. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 7

2:10pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'[/p][/quote]If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 2

2:18pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?
Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply.

QUOTE
More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..
UNQUOTE

You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything!
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.[/p][/quote]I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?[/p][/quote]Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything! Alekhine
  • Score: 13

1:16am Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Really??
Great to have most of you here on the same thrad..although one or two are missing...probably incarcerated or going door to door with ukip leaflets.."vote for us we will stop Johnny foreigner coming here taking our jobs, our women and our beer..

" You don't think that still"
No I dont think that. I said what I think..

'All the evidence" Has all the evidence been shown? Are you claiming it has?
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.[/p][/quote]You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Really??[/p][/quote]Great to have most of you here on the same thrad..although one or two are missing...probably incarcerated or going door to door with ukip leaflets.."vote for us we will stop Johnny foreigner coming here taking our jobs, our women and our beer.. " You don't think that still" No I dont think that. I said what I think.. 'All the evidence" Has all the evidence been shown? Are you claiming it has? ThisYear
  • Score: -6

1:17am Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Really??
BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it?
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.[/p][/quote]You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Really??[/p][/quote]BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it? ThisYear
  • Score: -8

1:19am Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
cg1blue wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong!
I stand by my assertion. The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people.
You just cannot admit that you are wrong, can you. Obviously it must be the US Census Bureau and the BBC that are wrong, not you.

It's quite embarrassing really.
Why on earth are you embarrassed..are you one of those who start laying flowers outside gates when celebs (people you have never met or known personally) pass away?

I stated what i stated..and i stand by that..if you feel thats wrong then thats what you feel...but please dont get embarrassed or you might go red..
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cg1blue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]Perhaps not. Maybe it's the same in the UK. Maybe we're surrounded by trailers / caravans and we don't even know it.... Man up and admit when you're wrong![/p][/quote]I stand by my assertion. The census is indeed ignored in the UK by registered people and in many cases doesn't even apply to whole numbers of people.[/p][/quote]You just cannot admit that you are wrong, can you. Obviously it must be the US Census Bureau and the BBC that are wrong, not you. It's quite embarrassing really.[/p][/quote]Why on earth are you embarrassed..are you one of those who start laying flowers outside gates when celebs (people you have never met or known personally) pass away? I stated what i stated..and i stand by that..if you feel thats wrong then thats what you feel...but please dont get embarrassed or you might go red.. ThisYear
  • Score: -11

1:24am Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.
Iv no idea..!

You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to...

There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'[/p][/quote]If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.[/p][/quote]Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming.. ThisYear
  • Score: -11

1:33am Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?
Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply.

QUOTE
More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..
UNQUOTE

You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything!
My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy..

As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate.

The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying"

Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.[/p][/quote]I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?[/p][/quote]Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything![/p][/quote]My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy.. As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate. The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying" Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per. ThisYear
  • Score: -10

10:08am Wed 30 Apr 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.
Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..
It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that.

Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse?

Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you.

As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!".

I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky!
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'[/p][/quote]If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.[/p][/quote]Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..[/p][/quote]It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that. Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse? Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you. As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!". I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky! Chris Flunk
  • Score: 17

11:45am Wed 30 Apr 14

Alekhine says...

ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?
Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything!
My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy.. As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate. The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying" Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per.
"If you are now saying" was the other poster asking you to clarify your statement. It is a pity that you cannot tie knots this well to secure your horses.

You are using Infer / Imply to obfuscate your way out of answering a straight question.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.[/p][/quote]I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?[/p][/quote]Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything![/p][/quote]My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy.. As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate. The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying" Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per.[/p][/quote]"If you are now saying" was the other poster asking you to clarify your statement. It is a pity that you cannot tie knots this well to secure your horses. You are using Infer / Imply to obfuscate your way out of answering a straight question. Alekhine
  • Score: 5

12:46pm Wed 30 Apr 14

blackheart says...

ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Really??
BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it?
I...just...did.

Aw, would you like me to use smaller words?
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.[/p][/quote]You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Really??[/p][/quote]BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it?[/p][/quote]I...just...did. Aw, would you like me to use smaller words? blackheart
  • Score: 4

10:14pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.
Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..
It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that.

Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse?

Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you.

As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!".

I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky!
So the census takes note of empty housing...how does this prove or disprove whatever it is you are trying to do?

You ask if houses fill in forms and then ask why the census takes note of vacant properties! How should I know its your source.

I said the other divvy because thats who i was referring to..the other divvy.

You have yet to provide 'facts' so far you have provided a 'census' which provides date of vacant properties..which would suggest it isn't a census..

Did your Grandma ever tell you to get a life? If she didn't then that was rather amiss of her.
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'[/p][/quote]If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.[/p][/quote]Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..[/p][/quote]It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that. Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse? Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you. As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!". I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky![/p][/quote]So the census takes note of empty housing...how does this prove or disprove whatever it is you are trying to do? You ask if houses fill in forms and then ask why the census takes note of vacant properties! How should I know its your source. I said the other divvy because thats who i was referring to..the other divvy. You have yet to provide 'facts' so far you have provided a 'census' which provides date of vacant properties..which would suggest it isn't a census.. Did your Grandma ever tell you to get a life? If she didn't then that was rather amiss of her. ThisYear
  • Score: -8

10:18pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
profondo asbo wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?
Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"
"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.
And thats all you wrote..
Or maybe just a lie.
Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"
It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.
I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..
Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?
I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.
Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.
I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?
Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything!
My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy.. As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate. The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying" Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per.
"If you are now saying" was the other poster asking you to clarify your statement. It is a pity that you cannot tie knots this well to secure your horses.

You are using Infer / Imply to obfuscate your way out of answering a straight question.
"horses" what horses? Do you think I own horses? Why would you think that..

Do you own a staffie, a hoodie, a greasy pair of creased track suit bottom, a t-shirt with the remnants of last nights kebab down the front and a rank pair of down at heel trainers?

No? Well there's a surprise.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it should be the law that all caravans have a registered keeper (including the stationery ones). then tax them off the face of the planet. e-petition anyone?[/p][/quote]Why would you want caravans taxed off the face of the planet? More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments..are you seriously suggesting these millions of people be made homeless just to appease your unnatural and irrational prejudices? WOW No wonder you dont use capitals to start a sentence (while pulling others for grammar and punctuation mistakes) Is it a variation on that old witch Thatchers mad comment "we are a grandmother" "We do not have to use capital letters to start a sentence"[/p][/quote]"More people in America live in trailers than in houses or apartments" Utter nonsense.[/p][/quote]And thats all you wrote..[/p][/quote]Or maybe just a lie.[/p][/quote]Have you actually looked into this before you claimed it as nonsense? Or have you just done so off the top of your head..ie the world is a sphere! "Utter nonsense"[/p][/quote]It isn't necessary to do any research to know that the assertion that over 150 million people in America live in trailers is complete rubbish. You can't just make up stuff and present them as facts, it destroys any credibility you may have left.[/p][/quote]I have not given a number for how many people live in trailers..so why make mention of 150 million people? Now go away and come back with something you have researched rather than decided must be the case because you think so..[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments". Given that the population of the USA is around 315 million, you have clearly stated that over 150 million people live in Manufactured/Mobile Homes or Trailers. These types of accommodation account for less than 7% of all housing units in the USA. At the last census there were approximately 9 million mobile homes and trailers (including semi-permanent or 'anchored' units). So, you are basically saying that each caravan in the USA houses at least 10 to 15 people and the remaining 125 million permanent housing units (houses or apartments) contain, on average, only one person. Do you stand by this assertion?[/p][/quote]I stated more people live in trailers ..no mention of caravans. Link to your source if you please.[/p][/quote]Once again, you said "More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments" The figure above includes Manufactured/Mobile Homes and Trailers. If you are now saying that you only meant trailers then the percentage is even lower. As I said previously, I took my figures from the US Census Bureau's American Housing Survey. All the data can be found on this website: http://www.census.go v/programs-surveys/a hs/ The BBC link I posted above has even more recent US housing data.[/p][/quote]I merely point out what I said not what you inferred I said (take note Alexhine. its inferred not implied) Again I ask the question; do all people diligently fill in census forms? The south is awash with settlements in trailers who do not conform to government rules/procedure/laws . The BBC is as reliable a source as any shady politicians spin-doctor...would you buy a used car from the BBC?[/p][/quote]Apparently you do not understand the use of infer / imply. QUOTE More people in america live in caravans (trailers) than they do houses or apartments.. UNQUOTE You have made a statement dimwit. There is no need for anybody to infer / imply anything![/p][/quote]My comment was an 'aside' to you while replying to the other divvy.. As you will recall you have great difficulty telling the difference between implied and inferred and I try to help you out at every turn..no thanks need..always good to help educate. The mention of imply/inferred came about by the poster stating: "If you are now saying" Just leave it alone because you know you will only slink off when you tie yourself in knots..as per.[/p][/quote]"If you are now saying" was the other poster asking you to clarify your statement. It is a pity that you cannot tie knots this well to secure your horses. You are using Infer / Imply to obfuscate your way out of answering a straight question.[/p][/quote]"horses" what horses? Do you think I own horses? Why would you think that.. Do you own a staffie, a hoodie, a greasy pair of creased track suit bottom, a t-shirt with the remnants of last nights kebab down the front and a rank pair of down at heel trainers? No? Well there's a surprise. ThisYear
  • Score: -4

10:20pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ThisYear says...

blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
blackheart wrote:
Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.)

ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.
Where is the bigotry you mention?

It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Really??
BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it?
I...just...did.

Aw, would you like me to use smaller words?
Where is the sample of bigotry you stated I was guilty of?

Use any words you like just provide the sample..if you can...*doesn't hold breath*
[quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]blackheart[/bold] wrote: Why do my own research when a Flunkey will do it for me? (sorry Chris, couldn't resist.) ThisYear, will never let the facts get in the way of a good bit of bigotry as he proves time after time.[/p][/quote]Where is the bigotry you mention? It would seem you see bigotry in every sentence...which is ironic when you and your ilk seemingly always accuse people of playing a mythical race card.[/p][/quote]You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Really??[/p][/quote]BTW where is the bigotry that you made mention of..would you like to post a sample of it?[/p][/quote]I...just...did. Aw, would you like me to use smaller words?[/p][/quote]Where is the sample of bigotry you stated I was guilty of? Use any words you like just provide the sample..if you can...*doesn't hold breath* ThisYear
  • Score: -5

10:29pm Wed 30 Apr 14

blackheart says...

You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"??

Get it??????
You don't think that still asserting that more people in America live in trailers than bricks and mortar despite all the evidence showing that that is completely wrong defines you as "One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"?? Get it?????? blackheart
  • Score: 5

10:28am Thu 1 May 14

Chris Flunk says...

ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote:
ThisYear wrote:
Chris Flunk wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?
Do all people fill in census forms?
It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.
Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'
If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.
Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..
It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that. Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse? Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you. As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!". I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky!
So the census takes note of empty housing...how does this prove or disprove whatever it is you are trying to do? You ask if houses fill in forms and then ask why the census takes note of vacant properties! How should I know its your source. I said the other divvy because thats who i was referring to..the other divvy. You have yet to provide 'facts' so far you have provided a 'census' which provides date of vacant properties..which would suggest it isn't a census.. Did your Grandma ever tell you to get a life? If she didn't then that was rather amiss of her.
I promised myself I wouldn't respond to you again but, as I have said this at least half a dozen times already, once more won't hurt.

The data is from the American Housing SURVEY which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. I have provided irrefutable facts you have responded with nothing but stubborn stupidity. You are plain wrong Porky.

As for getting a life, if you don't mind, I don't think I'll take advice on that from someone who has nothing better to do with their evenings than sit in front of their lonely keyboard snarling abuse at strangers.

Well napolean, it's been swill chatting to you but it has to stop as you are becoming a boar. Maybe next time you should do your hamwork before making wild assertions, after all there's snout as bad as a sow loser.
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: From the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/magazine-24135 022 "Mobile homes make up 6.4% of the US housing sector and there are 8.5m of them, down slightly on 2011, according to the US Census. The number of occupants is not recorded but it's estimated to total about 20 million." If this figure is more than the number of people living in houses or apartments, that leaves at least 270 million people who don't live in houses, apartments or mobile homes. Are you saying they are all homeless or perhaps live in tepees?[/p][/quote]Do all people fill in census forms?[/p][/quote]It was a housing census. I don't think houses fill in forms at all.[/p][/quote]Does anyone think "houses fill in forms" Although families have been described as 'households'[/p][/quote]If it's a household survey, why is there data for vacant properties? A household, by definition, must consist of one or more people.[/p][/quote]Iv no idea..! You say its a census which would suggest its about people rather than buildings, and then you point out it lists empty buildings...which shows it isn't the same as we are used to... There seems to be a flaw in it and thus isn't as clear cut as some on here are claiming..[/p][/quote]It is the American Housing Survey which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. It's pretty clear cut and, just to be clear, I don't 'feel' you are wrong. I know you are wrong and so do you. You are just not big enough to admit that. Also, why are you now calling me names ("the other divvy")? I've not made any personal remarks. Is it because you've lost the debate and that's your last recourse? Well, I have nothing further to say to you. You have made offensive remarks where none were warranted and you refuse to accept the cold hard facts presented to you. As my Grandmother used to say, "Don't argue with idiots, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot". She also said "Never argue with an idiot. It's akin to wrestling with a pig, you'll both end up covered in muck and besides which, the pig enjoys it!". I guess I should have listened to Grandma. Bye Porky![/p][/quote]So the census takes note of empty housing...how does this prove or disprove whatever it is you are trying to do? You ask if houses fill in forms and then ask why the census takes note of vacant properties! How should I know its your source. I said the other divvy because thats who i was referring to..the other divvy. You have yet to provide 'facts' so far you have provided a 'census' which provides date of vacant properties..which would suggest it isn't a census.. Did your Grandma ever tell you to get a life? If she didn't then that was rather amiss of her.[/p][/quote]I promised myself I wouldn't respond to you again but, as I have said this at least half a dozen times already, once more won't hurt. The data is from the American Housing SURVEY which is undertaken biannually by the US Census Bureau. I have provided irrefutable facts you have responded with nothing but stubborn stupidity. You are plain wrong Porky. As for getting a life, if you don't mind, I don't think I'll take advice on that from someone who has nothing better to do with their evenings than sit in front of their lonely keyboard snarling abuse at strangers. Well napolean, it's been swill chatting to you but it has to stop as you are becoming a boar. Maybe next time you should do your hamwork before making wild assertions, after all there's snout as bad as a sow loser. Chris Flunk
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree