I really really care cos I am a pc gone mad looney leftie ... some well educated intellectual called Pete said so!
You , on the other hand, are just a heartless bastard!
Pete has your number Sock-Dodger

I really really care cos I am a pc gone mad looney leftie ... some well educated intellectual called Pete said so!
You , on the other hand, are just a heartless bastard!

have I missed the response to HIAG banned... Yes or no?
Fosse. I've answered enough of your questions now, its about time you answered mine and then I will answer yours.
All I'm asking is for your opinion on GM's comments to matt th e other day. Its simple
Do you condemn him or not. Yes or no
Fosse. I've answered enough of your questions now, its about time you answered mine and then I will answer yours.
All I'm asking is for your opinion on GM's comments to matt th e other day. Its simple
Do you condemn him or not. Yes or no
Colossal mistake to forget that you'd called the Nazis fascist though, rather than just Le Pen!
I still can't believe that there is anyone stupid enough to run the line of argument that Pete did on that one......
.... so why don't we do it this way ... you answer the question that I asked FIRST, then I will answer yours
These are your words, Fosse, not mine. I've answered your questions about my opinion towards HIAG's status and his comments towards Autism, while you refuse to answer my one simple question. I will answer your next one once you answer mine.
So, do you condemn Skiddy's comments towards matt the other day, Yes or no ?
Piskie already has and you've skirted around them. Having a pop at poor innocent defenceless autistic children is a deplorable act of cowardice. As to use the words you like to use 'you're nothing but a contemptible piece of dogshit and a low life scumbag'. ...harmless young kids calling them window lickers!
I'm not answering your question as it's so hypocritical considering what you've had to say about exactly the same issue.
I've answered Piskie and Fosse's questions as they are only implicated in having your views through association.
How you have the gall to ask about children with autism and call comments related to autism vile etc is absolutely staggering considering what you've said and I've quoted you in black and white
Just because you were plastered when you wrote it doesn't make it any less despicable, you disgusting low life alcoholic
5 Genuine Questions;
- Are Piskie and Ginger Marks the same person?
- Are Hiag and Saints the same person?
- or Are there really 4 people doing this for real?
- Is this whole thread foreplay for the four or two of them?
- Why do I care?

Links, please.
If Pixie has already made the link(s), then it should be a simple enough process for you to copy and paste them.
Please do not bottle this, Skiddy.
Don't have too chump he's already posted it. I see you have two windows open tonight! I'm impressed you have the savvy to do that. Just answer Piskie question, no bottling it now!Links, please.
If Pixie has already made the link(s), then it should be a simple enough process for you to copy and paste them.
Please do not bottle this, Skiddy.
Do you condemn any comments mocking innocent defenceless children with autism i.e. Calling them window lickers etc.?I say don't bother with Skiddy anymore mate. I've documented the filth he directed the other day at matt and now unbelievably he thinks he can talk about the subject from some sort of moral highground !
Don't have too chump he's already posted it. I see you have two windows open tonight! I'm impressed you have the savvy to do that. Just answer Piskie question, no bottling it now!
Do you condemn any comments mocking innocent defenceless children with autism i.e. Calling them window lickers etc.?
Don't have too chump he's already posted it. I see you have two windows open tonight! I'm impressed you have the savvy to do that. Just answer Piskie question, no bottling it now!
I'm not going to bother asking you for a third time.
You cannot link to any such posts because no such posts exist.
Stop making false claims about me. The fact that you have resorted to such base tactics is as abhorrent as the appalling comments that you directed at Matth.
These are your words, Fosse, not mine. I've answered your questions about my opinion towards HIAG's status and his comments towards Autism, while you refuse to answer my one simple question. I will answer your next one once you answer mine.
So, do you condemn Skiddy's comments towards matt the other day, Yes or no ?
... a rather HIAG response... you've obviously been learning from the Mastered.....
.... so why don't we do it this way ... you answer the question that I asked FIRST, then I will answer yours ... which should quell the usual faux outrage ... whilst you do that perhaps also consider one of HIAG's favourite analogies... the one to the special needs kid on the bus that he commonly uses ...perhaps you could join us im condemnation ... it is, after all, pretty deplorable wouldn't you say? ...![]()
... I think you must have had a technical issue with the 'Reply' button ... you've inadvertently left out half of my initial question ... the one that you are claiming to have answered ... I've therfore taken the time to reproduce my post and have highlighted in bold the bit that you have inadvertently missed... I think it is important that you have this opportunity to fully answer; otherwise some less charitable than me might just think that the omission was some form of avoidance or deflection ... for the avoidance of doubt, you haven't yet addressed the bit in bold despite several requests
That's what it does Fosse HIAB only picks the bits he wants. Thinks it's being clever but we all know different. Tell me mate what's difficult with this question?... I think you must have had a technical issue with the 'Reply' button ... you've inadvertently left out half of my initial question ... the one that you are claiming to have answered ... I've therfore taken the time to reproduce my post and have highlighted in bold the bit that you have inadvertently missed... I think it is important that you have this opportunity to fully answer; otherwise some less charitable than me might just think that the omission was some form of avoidance or deflection ... for the avoidance of doubt, you haven't yet addressed the bit in bold despite several requests