BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 09:42 AM

I preferred Mary.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 09:46 AM

To be honest, so did I :-) I wonder what old 'Uncle Hughie' Green's thoughts were when she first showed up at the Opportunity Knocks auditions? Bet it not cultural at all...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:29 AM

On the one hand Teribus claims "For the umpteenth time no-one has suggested that "these crimes are "Muslim" in any way shape or form"
On the other, you continue to claim that Muslims have said just that.

We have never claimed either.
Islam and religion are not an issue in this crime, and I have been saying that since before I made that post.

Brainwashed Irish
I quoted historians who supported that criticism of Irish schools.
- Traveller persecution -
Completely made up shit.
defence of Ukip racism?
Completely made up shit.

Dave,
Why now? Because now is when it is happening

But it is always happening! Jim brings it up every few weeks and has done for six years.
You three have just never joined in before. I suppose you had not become a gang of four before.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:39 AM

Cooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!

Paranoia again, the is no gang, remember.

PS The bit Dave is actually denying is the "enthusiasm" that is entirely your creation.

He has already stated this explicitly, how is it you cannot comprehend that. Is it really that difficult?

Try sending a PM to terrikins, he might be able to explain it in words you can understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:39 AM

Jim,
For the umpteenth time
"Don I do " believe that all male Pakistani MUSLIMS have a culturally implanted tendency"

But you know those were not my words.
That is why I put them in quotes.
And you know that I can PROVE that I never blamed Islam.
You know that I stated, before and after that post, that religion was not an issue.

You know that because we have been through it all before.
You put up the same, tired, old, false accusations, and I knock them all down the same old way.
What is the point Jim?

You have no case against me because I am neither racist nor extremist.
How many more threads are you going to destroy with this?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:46 AM

Still haven't. Made up like my enthusiasm. Glad to see you have dropped your other ridiculous statements and are down to one unsubstantiated claim about something that has no bearing on anything whatsoever. How is your little gang doing? How may now? You, Teribus, Iains, Bobad Ake, Dozy, Sneaky, Sick and Bitch?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:47 AM

I'm not asking you to believe this but it's true. My best mate at school was on Opportunity Knocks at the same time as Mary Hopkin and she beat him into second place. There, told you you wouldn't believe me. I found the chap you meant to link to. Cheers for that. Could do with a few more like him.

The only way to judge a man's stupidity is by a close examination of his underpants drawer. --Eric The Red, 1982

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:50 AM

The 'musical muscle man', Tony Holland, was a butcher from Roe Green - Posh bit just down the road from us. Bet all the old dears loved going in his shop to get a peek at his best cuts...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:56 AM

"You three have just never joined in before. I suppose you had not become a gang of four before."

Really? Why, you've just been asking me whether I "still deny it" and trying to pin something on me from those inglorious times, Keith! As Hughie Green would have said, it's make your mind up time! (Or was that Michael Miles...)

Actually, "make it up as you go along time" would be more like it! Fraudulent!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 10:58 AM

Ah, the man of the clenching buttocks! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 11:03 AM

My mate told me that Hughie Green was an utterly arrogant, bad-tempered a-hole. That reminds me...🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 11:09 AM

One for the ladies though, so it has been reported. Probably culturally implanted. Wasn't he Paula Yates's Dad when everyone thought it was Bishop Jess?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 11:25 AM

But you know those were not my words.
That is why I put them in quotes.
Don asked if that is what you believed - you confirmed it was
"And you know that I can PROVE that I never blamed Islam."
Nobody has ever suggested yo did - your claim was the Muslim, which is what we are discussing
"You put up the same, tired, old, false accusations, and I knock them all down the same old way."
You have your own quote in front of you - is it a fake?
"I am neither racist nor extremist."
Then it must have been somebody else using your name to say what was said about Irish brainwashing and Travellers - and all that support for racist Ukip........ !!
Hoist on your own petard as naval Norman will tell you
Unless you have something to say otehr than denials - don't bother
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 11:44 AM

D THE G. To be associated with a mythical gang is far superior than being in a pack of curs doncha think?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:35 PM

A fine display of erudition and intellect, doncha think
Hit and run seems the order of the day with this here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:39 PM

To be associated with a mythical gang is far superior than being in a pack of curs doncha think?

WTF are you on about Iains? Seeing as neither exist apart from in the deluded minds of some members that is a particularly stupid question. The nearest description, which applies to everyone involved in both sides of this argument was Joe's description - 'The usual suspects'.

On a much better subject we just had some lovely pancakes. Decided against making them this year which is just as well because neither Mrs G nor I feel up to much at the mo. They were bought ready made crepes, heated in the microwave and delicious with a full fat cream cheese filling with assorted berries and topped with Lancashire Farm yogurt. Bit odd having a healthy(ish) pancake as it is supposed to be the last splurge before the rigours of lent. Still, seeing as we don't do lent it is no big deal :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:44 PM

Steve,
Why, you've just been asking me whether I "still deny it"

Not true. That is what I asked you back in 2011.
You had given every reason to believe you denied the over-representation in your total support for Jim.

You said you never had, and went on to say,
"I can't deny bare, factual, context-innocent statistics and neither can anyone else."

That gives every impression of accepting the over-representation, but I invite you now to state if you accept or deny it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:49 PM

He and bobad are two cheeks of the same sorry arse. No substance, no debating skills, no-nothing trolls. Here for the fight only. Even Keith and Teribus aren't of that ilk. An arse, what's more, that even an Asda George underpant, were it sentient, would rebel against. Ignore 'em. Now they're going to swear at me, just you watch.

Reminds me of a phase that M&S went through a few years back when everything suddenly became singular. Shorts became a short. Jeans became a jean. Pants became pant. Trousers became trouser. Briefs became brief. Knickers became knicker. "Why, that looks like just the jean for me!" I was once heard to declare in the Blue Harbour aisle!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:51 PM

And don't change the subject, Keith. You said we've only just joined in, now you're quoting me from 2011. Wheatcroftesque again. Over to you, Teribus!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:52 PM

Jim,

Nobody has ever suggested yo did - your claim was the Muslim, which is what we are discussing

You knowingly lie Jim.
I have never suggested that it was a Muslim issue.
I made it very clear that I did not.

I used the description "British Pakistani Muslims" because that was the description put to me, and I put it in quotes for that reason.

The "Muslim" was superfluous, but I left it in AS I HAD ALREADY MADE CLEAR THAT BEING MUSLIM WAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

I had no way of knowing some lying scum would take that out of its context to try and smear me with blatant lies based on knowingly misrepresenting what I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:52 PM

D the G. Glad you enjoyed the pancakes. I like mine with maple syrup.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:53 PM

Should probably stick to important topics like who would win a fight between Superman and Batman. They both wear their underpants on the outside don't they?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 12:57 PM

Steve, how dishonest you are!
And don't change the subject, Keith. You said we've only just joined in, now you're quoting me from 2011. Wheatcroftesque again.

Of course we were all in the original thread, but Jim has dredged it up many times since.
This is the first time that you have all joined in.
Now it is one for all and all for one in your little gang of musketeers.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 01:13 PM

Odd isn't it Shaw that you mentioned arses - the only people who have made complete and utter arses of them selves on this thread have been Jim Carroll who was the person to drag this thread back to 2011, yourself responsible for the attempted deflection by spreading your 2014 "Wheatcroft" lie.

For those wondering what that was all about read on:

How Steve Shaw "makes up shit" and what an acknowledgement and correction of an error looks like:

On the 10th December, 2014 the following text was faithfully and accurately posted by Keith A of Hertford in a thread titled "WWI was No Mans Land" from an article by Geoffrey Wheatcroft that appeared in the Guardian, 9 Dec 2014

"That series had been preceded in 1963 by AJP Taylor's rather vulgar book, The First World War: An Illustrated History, and Oh, What a Lovely War!, Joan Littlewood's musical pasquinade. The latter, which used the songs the Tommies had sung in the trenches, drew on Alan Clark's 1961 book The Donkeys – a largely fraudulent book, whose title derives from an invented quotation about "lions led by donkeys", that nevertheless made a mark."

This thread was closed on 18th December but the discussion continued on another WWI thread titled "I am not an historian but ..." in which Keith A made a passing reference to the passage quoted above on the 17th December, 2014

The Guardian last week described the work of Clark and Taylor as "fraudulent."

Steve Shaw questioned this and within an hour of Steve Shaw posting Keith A of Hertford replied as follows:

Subject: RE: BS: I am not an historian but........
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 17 Dec 14 - 11:22 AM

Ok Steve. [The acknowledgement]
The Guardian printed a piece, by a Guardian correspondent, that described Taylor and Clark's work as "vulgar" and "fraudulent." [The correction]

IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED BY:

Subject: RE: BS: I am not an historian but........
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 17 Dec 14 - 11:25 AM

The Guardian printed a piece, by a Guardian correspondent, that described Taylor and Clark's work as "vulgar" and "fraudulent" respectively. [Further correction making clear what adjective applied to which author's work]

After the above acknowledgment and correction had been given in the "I am not an historian but ...." thread the complete passage from Wheatcroft's article was posted five times which when you couple that to the speed of Keith A's response and correction blows the Shaw theory of it being deliberate misrepresentation clear out of the water - and yet Shaw to this day still attempts to convey the idea that no acknowledgement and correction was ever made, which of course is a downright LIE.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 01:25 PM

Seems we've retreated back to the trenches
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 01:33 PM

An interesting response by some to my post of 28 Feb 17 - 11:44 AM

Matthew 7:16

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 01:39 PM

Maple syrup is good to. Albeit a little colonial :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 01:43 PM

Bo-ring, Teribus! You're defending a deliberate attempt at deceit! Have you got your underpants on back to front? Or are your knickers in a twist?

You forgot John Major à la Steve Bell, Dave!

I'm told that Jeremy Kyle always goes commando. Now there's an interesting fact!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 02:06 PM

I had forgotten about that Steve - I don't really follow Steve Bell but I do recall one or two of those. Funny thing is, our erstwhile grey PM has been a bit of a star recently with his comments on Brexit. I never thought I would see that day when he would make me smile :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 02:19 PM

Boring - you certainly are Shaw. It must be an awful burden being a serial "Gobshite".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 03:00 PM

D the G. It is not just Canada that produces maple syrup, there is appreciable production in the northern States of America also. That colonial title may upset our American cousins.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 04:24 PM

Don't take any notice of me then, Billy. I'd like that. In some ways it'd be less fun, admittedly, but I'm only thinking of you. You'd live a lot longer if you didn't get so agitated all the time. Very few people read what we type and a good few of THEM already hate your guts, so what's the point? Eh? Eh??

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 05:11 PM

I know, Iains, I know.

You know, Steve. I caught a bit of classic last of the summer wine earlier. A new customer in Sid's cafe got a right ear bashing of Ivy. When she went in the back the new customer said to Sid "Is that yours?"
On getting am affirmative answer he then asked "would it not be quicker just to cut your throat?"

It's like that here at times...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 05:17 PM

I have a photo of me playing the theme tune on the harmonica outside that café. You can see Compo inside! My sister lives just three miles away.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Feb 17 - 05:21 PM

It's not real life here, Dave. There are plenty of real people but a good few whose main outlet in life seems to be here. Thinking of our friendly neighbourhood cabal. Funny how you never hear much about their real lives...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 01:44 AM

Ah but Shaw as someone who does not like to see, and cannot "stand to see" lies, misrepresentations, myths and half-truths peddled and presented as fact in discussions on this forum I am naturally drawn to the idiotic ramblings of you and your "socialist" little gang. The other factor of course is your stalking and attempts at browbeating and bullying certain members of this forum by you and your pals.

As previously stated, on this thread and on many others you've made complete and utter arses of yourselves. I cannot think of any good reason why on earth I would wish to share any aspect or detail of my "real life" with any proven loutish, posturing, lying, prat such as yourself or any of your equally objectionable pals.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 03:24 AM

Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 03:25 AM

Sorry, missed a bit

Hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahhahahahahahahahaha

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 04:31 AM

Iains
Your posting of "28 Feb 17 - 11:44 AM " was a meaningless piece of invective which is made ridiculous by the fact that you have now become a fully paid up member o Teribus and co's Klan Storm-Troopers with their empty right wing posturings - if you cannot see the irony of referring to us as "a pack", you are even more stupid that you appear.
Your Gruppenführer, having painted himself into a corner by making claims he is unable substantiate, first retreated back into the trenches of World War One, and has now falling back to his old habit of hurling insecure abuse.
As Keith has often been heard to remark "they lost".

With that comforting thought under my belt, I'm outta here and I suggest anybody with a modicum of sense and self-respect follows suit.
This level of posting debases this forum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 04:33 AM

Jim has raised the old 2011 thread many, many times since then.
Previously he has had to do it on his own.
If the mods did not close it down, other folk would beg him to stop.
He would eventually issue a gushing, grovelling apology and promise not to do it again.
A few weeks later, when he was losing another argument, he would do it again.

Now he has a gang to back him up and support him, and understandably few people are prepared to take them all on.
You have created a monster!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 04:34 AM

Dave, anyone can type what you just did.
Responding to what has been said is harder.
Impossible for some apparently.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 04:41 AM

It was a response, Keith. How better to respond to personal abuse or would you rather I respond in kind?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 05:13 AM

What personal abuse were you responding to gnome?

It has plainly and conclusively been proven on this thread that both Steve Shaw and Jim Carroll are liars. It is an opinion of mine, but no doubt shared by others, that their behaviour is loutish and posturing, and Steve Shaw is without any doubt in my mind an objectionable, complete and utter prat.

So were you responding as a non-member of a non-clique on this forum or did you consider that you yourself had been personally abused as said non-member of that non-clique on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 05:21 AM

Work it out for yourself, Teribus :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 06:32 AM

hughie greene was nice to me. i would have been on his show - only they closed it down. it would have been a big career break for me.

no one much gives ordinary people breaks in the music business. hughie did.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 06:36 AM

As a much more interesting topic than what has been going on here of late that is worth exploring, Al. There was 'Opportunity Knocks' and another talent show called 'New faces' if I remember rightly. What is so different between those and the the new flush of talent shows such as 'Britains got talent', 'The X Factor'. 'The Voice', etc.?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 06:40 AM

Flashback time! I seem to remember that Lenny Henry won 'New Faces'. I think the first time he appeared he did an impression of Frank Spencer bent over a pram talking to his baby. When he turned round the audience were in stitches and Lenny had them from that moment on :-) Eeeeh. Those were the days (Back to Mary Hopkin)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 06:53 AM

I wasn't knocking Hughie, Al, just reporting back what my mate said!

Teribus, you need to stop ranting on about "proven liars," etc. Nobody "proves" a damn thing about anybody else on this forum. "Proofs" of the kind you propagate are predicated on half-truths, omissions, missing the point, deserting the context, personal bias, axes to grind, the need for vengeance or out-and-out misrepresentation. Every time you call me or anybody else a "proven liar" you are making an arse of yourself. It's just empty, splenetic, distempered bile and it's almost certainly pissing a damn sight more people off than those who get any satisfaction from your horrible behaviour. If you think we deserve it, keep it to yourself and demolish us via measured, careful argument. Every time you feel the steam coming out of your ears at the keyboard you need to say to yourself that you shouldn't be starting from here.

Right. Back to the show...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 07:31 AM

Please correct me if I am wrong here Shaw but you did state on numerous occasions on many threads that Keith A of Hertford had never corrected himself, or acknowledged that he had misquoted from an article by Geoffrey Wheatcroft that appeared in the Guardian in December 2014. Even after it had been drawn to your attention that you were in error, you still persisted with your lie - That makes you a proven liar by any definition of the word, and it should come as no surprise to you that that shall be taken into consideration with regard to anything you post to this forum.

"If you think we deserve it, keep it to yourself and demolish us via measured, careful argument." - Shaw

Good heavens Shaw it would make one hell of a departure from the norm if either yourself or your pals ever even made the slightest pretence of following that bit of advice - all we tend to get is personal abuse, no point addressed and baseless allegations and accusations that you point blank refuse to substantiate.

Oh Gnome, I worked you and your pals out a long, long time ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Mar 17 - 07:42 AM

So it was a rhetorical question? What is the point in that?

Do you actually know anything about anyone?

(Hint. See line 1)

:D tG