Do you sell spam on your site ? I used to enjoy spam sandwiches, but I find it too expensive these days.
I didn’t think these links were allowed here, may be wrong, best to ask the people who are busy in Manchester at present.
Typical lefty, Dobie, is giving you a masterclass, so you resort to i am telling sir.
Define “Leftie” and how you put me in that category
By “Telling sir” I’m guessing ( In your small minded world) you mean report it ? I haven’t , I will refrain from calling you a liar , as the bending of the truth is your modus operandi which everyone is accustomed to.
Same as Phil tried, and was shot down I was merely trying to help, and it has been twisted around which is sad.
You weren't trying to be helpful , just snidey as usual and got called out accurately for it .
You’re wrong
If someone tries to help you accross the road, they aren’t trying to nick your purse .
If they point to the other side of the road, they aren’t a member of Isis .
Get help.
People are more than capable of seeing straight through your stuff , however you might want to try and dress up the words , Rainman called it right . I suggest if you have anything to say about Isis you should contribute to the TR thread instead of slyly trying to introduce it on here . I don't need any help , I don't have any problems controlling my emotions on a forum .
Are you suggesting Rainman should stick to the TR thread with his views on the above?
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Anyone that could relate these horrific crimes against young children, with car problems, is extremely foolish.
All of a sudden you care about the victims ..I thought you were too busy trying to blame the parents
This is an extreme extortion of what I said, but typical of you.
Do you sell spam on your site ? I used to enjoy spam sandwiches, but I find it too expensive these days.
I didn’t think these links were allowed here, may be wrong, best to ask the people who are busy in Manchester at present.
Typical lefty, Dobie, is giving you a masterclass, so you resort to i am telling sir.
Define “Leftie” and how you put me in that category
By “Telling sir” I’m guessing ( In your small minded world) you mean report it ? I haven’t , I will refrain from calling you a liar , as the bending of the truth is your modus operandi which everyone is accustomed to.
Same as Phil tried, and was shot down I was merely trying to help, and it has been twisted around which is sad.
You weren't trying to be helpful , just snidey as usual and got called out accurately for it .
You’re wrong
If someone tries to help you accross the road, they aren’t trying to nick your purse .
If they point to the other side of the road, they aren’t a member of Isis .
Get help.
People are more than capable of seeing straight through your stuff , however you might want to try and dress up the words , Rainman called it right . I suggest if you have anything to say about Isis you should contribute to the TR thread instead of slyly trying to introduce it on here . I don't need any help , I don't have any problems controlling my emotions on a forum .
Are you suggesting Rainman should stick to the TR thread with his views on the above?
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Anyone that could relate these horrific crimes against young children, with car problems, is extremely foolish.
All of a sudden you care about the victims ..I thought you were too busy trying to blame the parents
This is an extreme extortion of what I said, but typical of you.
Do you mean distortion , professor?
No I meant exaggerated as per the post.
extortion /ɪkˈstɔːʃ(ə)n,ɛkˈstɔːʃ(ə)n/Submit noun the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats. "he used bribery and extortion to build himself a huge, art-stuffed mansion" synonyms: demanding money with menaces, exaction, extraction, blackmail; shakedown "he was arrested on a charge of extortion"
Anyway , will leave you to your nonsensical inane ramblings , I have a lamb hotpot to attend to , and to be quite honest , even though the sheep is dead , it'll still provide a more reasoned conversation .
Surprised your gang hasn't backed you up with a couple of pictures.
haysie anyone who partly blames the parents of child rape victims, in my eyes and every decent thinking person is a disgusting person.
You just seem only able to repeat distorted opinions, and completely unable to answer the simplest of questions. What no pictures? I have been clear in my view of the evil perpetrators of these crimes.
I have also been clear that I would not rush to offer the parents of the victims any awards for the safety and protection that they have offered to their children.
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
As to be expected from an ex solicitor (emphasis on the ex ) plenty of rhetoric , but no real substance . Guess what , in real life people generally give back as good as they get . Also in real life, people who stick up for the IRA aren't the sort of people whos opinions you would value !
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
The whole gang is much more productive making hotpots than posting on this forum.
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
"At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
The whole gang is much more productive making hotpots than posting on this forum."
You could probably do with a lesson in quoting properly
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
Also posting such a stupid argument hardly respects the victims. The fact that this argument was incorrect just exacerbates matters.
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
"Also posting such a stupid argument hardly respects the victims. The fact that this argument was incorrect just exacerbates matters".
Showing empathy for victims after your ill advised and ignorant tirade on the TR thread is pretty much too late .
If the car developed a fault with the brakes and steering , do you still blame the driver , or the manufacturer?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck . It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
As to be expected from an ex solicitor (emphasis on the ex ) plenty of rhetoric , but no real substance . Guess what , in real life people generally give back as good as they get . Also in real life, people who stick up for the IRA aren't the sort of people whos opinions you would value !
Are you referring to Renault driving members of the IRA?
To be honest , Haysie , I'm a little concerned after reading most of your recent posts , that the whole thread isn't really helping whatever mental health issues you might have . I wonder what social media users would make of you and a couple of others, should anyone who had a FB account for instance duplicate this thread for general viewing . I genuinely think there would be some concern for you . There is help out there .
Comments
What no pictures?
I have been clear in my view of the evil perpetrators of these crimes.
I have also been clear that I would not rush to offer the parents of the victims any awards for the safety and protection that they have offered to their children.
What about you?
Who do I blame ..ummm the driver obv. Strangely enough you aren't likely to think or know about any potential manufacturers faults as you hit the deck .
It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
As to be expected from an ex solicitor (emphasis on the ex ) plenty of rhetoric , but no real substance . Guess what , in real life people generally give back as good as they get . Also in real life, people who stick up for the IRA aren't the sort of people whos opinions you would value !
It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
The whole gang is much more productive making hotpots than posting on this forum.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
"At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
The whole gang is much more productive making hotpots than posting on this forum."
You could probably do with a lesson in quoting properly
It's ultimately the responsibility of the driver to ensure his car is roadworthy ...if the driver ran me over , he would be the person to sue not the manufacturer, and then I guess he could sue the manufacturer in return .. I'm sure Mr essexphil aka Ironside will be along to correct me shortly , but without exactly saying why i'm wrong
In least shocking news of the day, dobie continues to insult people. The only different thing is, in amongst the bile, there is actually a real opinion.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
Also posting such a stupid argument hardly respects the victims. The fact that this argument was incorrect just exacerbates matters.
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
"Also posting such a stupid argument hardly respects the victims. The fact that this argument was incorrect just exacerbates matters".
Showing empathy for victims after your ill advised and ignorant tirade on the TR thread is pretty much too late .
First thought was to try and gently point out the differences between strict liability torts and regular ones such as negligence.
But we all know what would happen next. You would demand I give further thoughts, then **** me off by saying you knew that really, and carry on in the wrong direction.
So I will keep it nice and simple. Tom is 100% right. You are 100% wrong. Much like life, really.
At least I now know why you want to keep your opinions secret, if they are as ill-thought out as that one....
As to be expected from an ex solicitor (emphasis on the ex ) plenty of rhetoric , but no real substance . Guess what , in real life people generally give back as good as they get . Also in real life, people who stick up for the IRA aren't the sort of people whos opinions you would value !
Are you referring to Renault driving members of the IRA?