Wednesday, April 04, 2012

Post Office - Why not upset the Germans!

Life is so difficult these days, attitudes have changed and as a fifty something I display all the external signs of being a grumpy git and I suppose it's an involuntary reflex to change, what was once acceptable and mainstream is no longer. This story I find particularly irritating about Royal Mail  taking exception to comic postcards produced by Bamforth's (for 140 years), complaining that a couple postcards from the first and second world wars were anti-Germanic. 

I feel drained by the shallow superficiality of political correctness and failure to acknowledge that there was a time, when there was every reason to make fun of Germans, since they were involved in both wars of killing on an industrial scale, admittedly years later Germany is a benign country with no aspirations to meddle or interfere in the affairs of other European states, except perhaps if you happen to be living in Greece, a view it seems is being disgracefully promoted by bad taste propagandist.

Just to finish off, this bit as far as I can tell most Brits if they delve a bit will find themselves to have a mix of nationalities in their ancestry so what's wrong with joking about other nationalities.

These days people are so sensitive, whatever happened, to humour, we live in an age when minority group's can threaten and bully anyone  they consider to have insulted them, with impunity and people like me in their fifties, who grow up in more liberal times, when you could make a joke about differences without feeling stifled and threatened, now find it necessary to self censor before speaking.

How trivial some things now seem, recently I was asked if I could "Like" some biodiversity cods wallop on a facebook site,  Cllr John Worrow had sent an email directing me to The Thanet Diversity Network, it now being seems PC's so mind boggling, all the traps of what is and what isn't acceptable, apparently he was hoping I would "like", well to be honest I dont have an opinion, still I see in association with the "Red Hall" crowd a video has emerged of Nigel Farage, daring not or rather I quote Norman Thomas "refused to support the principle that gay people should be allowed the same rights to marriage as others." when questioned by John Worrow, exactly who the others might be I'm not sure. The line of questioning seemed to me to be bullying in the way, that kids use to demand to know what football team you support.

We've seen vast leaps in social equality, homosexuality was outlawed until 1967, nobody is bothered outside of the bigotted world of the church or those lot who enslave women and issue death threats against cartoonists and authors.

Myself I think most of us accept civil partnerships as the equivalent to marriage, so what's problem, marriage was defined until about five minutes ago as the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc




78 comments:

  1. It's all about stirring up division, in my opinion, Tony. Good old Nige wasn't having any of it, tho', despite Worrow's urgings.

    The beardy mob that enslave women and threaten Danish Jewish cartoonists are generally tied in with the freemasons, namely, the Muslim Brotherhood (started by Lawrence of Arabia for MI6). That's right, more divide and rule.

    Take a really free country, like Gadaffi's Libya, and the women were as free as a bird, not that they immediately felt the urge to begin acting like brainwashed, wayward trollops.

    Unfortunately, Gadaffi's Libya was a glaring example to others of just how good a free society can be, so the banksters put an end to it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tony

    Has no one told you not to believe everything you read in the tabloid press? Or at least take things with a pinch of salt.

    Here's why:

    This Daily Mail piece is a classic case of sensationalist churnalism. A DM hack takes a story off the news wire and sensationalises it. All we have here is one man's tale of how his postcards have been "banned" by the Royal Mail but do we take his account at face value without hearing the other side of the story? I wouldn't.

    Perhaps it's less a case of "PC gorn mad" and more a fear of litigation as regards cash-strapped organisations/public sector departments. I never hear much about law firms and their rabid desire to win compensation for any slighted party on a no win no pay basis. Perhaps this is the true source of these stories.

    There again, having written the above leftyliberalfascist twaddle I'd much rather blame things on the shadowy world of the PC brigade/hooman rights lobby/elf & safety lot!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What a one track mind the insidious Worrow has. Diversity champion, why he does not even know the meaning of the word.

    UKIP might be something of a one policy, out of the EU, party, but Worrow and Driver are fast becoming obsessed with gay rights to the exclusion of all others. Wonder what their electorate must think.

    As for the Red Hall duo, imagine spending your whole life protesting. I recall being angry and incensed about a few issues in my formative years, but happily I out grew such nonsense. Not the dreaded Norman and Christine who still look like left overs from a CND march.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tony, it is but an assault by a vociferous minority who will not be satisfied until we are all gay, cruising around in pink shirts and hugging each other. Mind you, when I look at modern day footballers celebrating a goal, which is what they are overpaid to score, it seems we are well on the way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Elvis wore a pink shirt and he was no poofter!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon 6.11

    When Elvis wore a pink shirt the colour and several words in the English language had not been hijacked. Indeed, back then cruising was still something folk did on ships and boats, not round toilets.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The masonic mind games are coming thick and fast now, the high priests (of detritus) are attempting to divert attention from the real problems.

    Of serious concern is the brainwashing and indoctrination of our youngsters.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 11:00, are you talking about Clause 28 again? Today we are going to discuss life style choices so do you want to be straight, gay or masonic? No, Perkins, you cannot be a lesbian, only girls can be lesbians. Yes, I know that is sexist, but at least you can dress in drag and pretend.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nobody is allowed to object to anything anymore , peoples opinions only count if they agree with big brothers.

    People have every right to object to gay marriages if they wish.

    How many would be happy for children to be adopted....seems nowadays anything goes and sod nature !

    ReplyDelete
  11. 10:27 You are allowed to object but you will be labelled homophobic if you do with a fair chance of having your collar felt.

    On the other hand, the Godless can castigated the church, the Bible, the bishops and dismiss the faithful as dim or clutching to fairy stories. We do not have the same right as them to take offence or call them the evil, spawn of the devil, which of course they are.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wouldn't give much for your chances of getting through the pearly gates now, Peter.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Why? I certainly don't see being gay as a bad thing...

    However I do agree that homosexuals should compromise & be satisfied with the words "Civil Partnership" (as long as they have the same legal rights as married couples). Not that I'd ever want to marry anyone, of any gender or sexual persuasion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You miss the point here which is not whether being gay is bad or not, but that those of us that are not would resent being called such. Imagine that applies to Jesus as well and, whilst evidence is not strong on that era, if anything it more hints at him being a bit keen on Mary Magdalene.

    Anyway, who really knows, and my earlier comment was intended in light hearted mode. After all, what would the blogs in paradise be like without your snippets from time to time.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Just to inject one fact into this further unproductive stoking of the equal marriage fire by a) Worrow and b) his opponents, who range from those with genuine alternative opinions through to bigots...

    Being gay is not a lifestyle choice. It is a natural state, just as is being born male or female, black, brown or white and so on. Religion and faith is entirely a matter of choice, just like joining a club or society.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 10:50 If you say so, though not sure Michael Jackson would have agreed with you. He was white with surgically small features by choice in the same way that some people undergo sex change operations, by choice.

    Whilst one might accept that being gay is a natural state, just how do you explain bisexual and transvestite? Maybe that depends on the moon or wind direction?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Meant to address the post above to 7:04. Don't know what quite went wrong there.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 7:04, I agree with your points, however, I have seen plenty of evidence to support the fact that there is a corporate agenda intent on interfering in our hormonal and psychological sexual development using chemicals, media brainwashing and a sex education programme that can, at best, be described as destructive, according to christian beliefs.

    There was recently a petition in the US to have the oestrogen mimmicker, 'Bisphenol A', removed from food packaging. The Food and Drug Administration denied the request.

    Why? Because they are working for a pack of criminals who want to finish us off as quickly as possible, as I am sure you are aware.

    And the psychological barrage, too, will continue, because it is an age old agenda that is not for stopping, at least not with requests, protests or petitions.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Why does this blog attract so many loonies?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Tony you should be ashamed of yourself allowing idiots like Gordon Blimey to suggets that John Worrow should be hung for simply fighting for equality. Comments such as this are bordering on the illegal

    ReplyDelete
  21. Illegal in the statutory sense, Ian, but if Worrow is involved in pursuing the UN agenda to interfere with our sexuality, for political reasons, his actions may quite reasonably be construed as treason against the people of this country, and treason, under common law, is a hanging offence.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ian Driver, Tony is allowing that sort of lunacy and Moores is allowing terms like "poofter" on his blog. Then the likes of Tom Clarke wonder why others are so freely alleging homophobia. As I have commented before, some have reasonable arguments against the Government's proposals; others are driven by pure bible-fuelled bigotry.

    Incidentally, Tom Clarke, you mention - in another place - how Mr Gale has been lambasted for his - in your view perfectly reasonable - rant in the press. He is not a homophobe for opposing equal marriage, most definitely. But why has he opposed every measure intended to give equality to LGBT individuals? Why has he always refused to condemn homophobic violence? Given those wider facts, if he does not suffer from homophobia, what drives his "principles"?

    ReplyDelete
  23. "University of Missouri researchers have evidence that BPA causes male deer mice to lose their masculinity and behave more like females. In fact, female mice sense something isn't quite "right" about BPA exposed males and don't want to mate with them.

    The scientists conclude that exposure to BPA during human development could also be wreaking havoc on hormones and distorting and disrupting behavioral and cognitive traits that are unique to each sex and important in reproduction.

    "The BPA-exposed deer mice in our study look normal; there is nothing obviously wrong with them. Yet, they are clearly different," said Cheryl Rosenfeld, associate professor in biomedical sciences in the College of Veterinary Medicine and investigator in the Bond Life Sciences Center, in a statement to the media. "Females do not want to mate with BPA-exposed male deer mice, and BPA-exposed males perform worse on spatial navigation tasks that assess their ability to find female partners in the wild."

    ReplyDelete
  24. I wonder who was manufacturing these chemicals in decades and centuries past when homosexuals existed. Funny that...

    ReplyDelete
  25. "... Underage sex was unavoidable, it was thought, and so the only thing to do was mitigate its worst effects.

    But this attitude was accompanied by a deliberate attempt to destroy the notion of respectability. Not only are official blind eyes turned to breaches of the legal age of consent, but sex education actually targets teenagers and underage children with a direct attack on society's fundamental values by promoting a libertarian agenda.

    So sex education teaching manuals set out the full range of sexual positions, partnering and perversions. Much of it looks like propaganda for sexual licence; some of it is so exploitative it verges on the predatory.

    Indeed, it is not so much education as indoctrination into ideas underlying the global family planning movement. The International Planned Parenthood Federation promotes sexual pleasure as a 'valid sexual and reproductive health need for all young people' - defined as aged ten to 24.

    And the first director of the World Health Organisation, Dr Brock Chisholm, believed the barrier to civilised life was the notion of right and wrong, and wanted children to be freed from such prejudices through introducing sex education from the age of nine.

    Many of our sex education programmes - some aimed at children even younger than nine - stem directly from these destructive and nihilistic ideas. Far from merely aiming to reduce teenage pregnancy rates, they are an attempt to restructure family life around a sexual free-for-all..."

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just to make it clear, this is a United Nations agenda to weaken and destroy us, although it's origins can be traced back to the elitist think tanks in London of more than a century ago.

    The UN, by the way, is 'owned' lock, stock and barrel, by the international banksters and assorted hangers-on.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Tony I am disgusted by some of the postings you have allowed here. To give space to people who advocate hanging John Worrow becuse he has legitmately spoke out in favour of LGBT is an appalling thing to do. I am afraid you have gone down in my estimation. The least you can do is to remove the posts and aplogise to John.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Are we not get a little over sensitive in our advancing years, Ian, for Gordon was but offering an opinion. No different really to saying someone should be horse whipped when we all know, in this day, it is simply not going to happen.

    I also doubt this comes anywhere near illegality or a case the DPP could pursue. Different if he actually attempted the hanging or incited a lynch mob.

    When all said and done, is it any more violent than inviting outside a colleague who has called you a tosser. Perhaps you should remember the old adage of 'He who lives by the sword etc.'

    You are also a prime example of someone of takes advantage of the freedom of speech and the right to demonstrate that we enjoy in this country. Please do not deny others the right to their opinions or to Tony to publish them.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Are we not get a little over sensitive in our advancing years, Ian, for Gordon was but offering an opinion. No different really to saying someone should be horse whipped when we all know, in this day, it is simply not going to happen.

    I also doubt this comes anywhere near illegality or a case the DPP could pursue. Different if he actually attempted the hanging or incited a lynch mob.

    When all said and done, is it any more violent than inviting outside a colleague who has called you a tosser. Perhaps you should remember the old adage of 'He who lives by the sword etc.'

    You are also a prime example of someone of takes advantage of the freedom of speech and the right to demonstrate that we enjoy in this country. Please do not deny others the right to their opinions or to Tony to publish them.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Tom Clarke (or whoever you are possibly a councillor of Tory persuasion) you are talking nonsense. Calls to hang John becuse he speaks in favour of LGBT equality are in my opionion bordering on incitement to commit violence against gays, lesbians and bisexuals who challenge injustice. To think this type of bullying and incitiment is acceptable suggests to me that you are a sick indvidual

    ReplyDelete
  31. Ian, see you and Worrow try the same pitch. Why does anyone who disagrees with you have to be a Tory councillor. Not sure how many of such there are in Thanet, but they are but a minute fraction of the rest of us.

    Thanks also for the sick individual label. If that is the best you can come up with on the debating front, we would seem to have little to fear. Think you might well be out of your league here.

    ReplyDelete
  32. just for the benefit of Cllr Driver assuming it is he, I have only just read this thread and if Cllr Worrow is offended I will withdraw the comment, Still its worth noting cllr Driver as we know rubbished tory councillors for not doing enough for animal rights when he was on top of mount Moral Highground,

    Ian get a life old boy, I've been drinking so I will not make any rash deletion just over some bullying posturing, I think gordon blimey was no more rude than you stunt at the turner contemporary

    anyway I've got a rare sunday off with family and am enjoying a drink

    I suggest any sanctimonious readers have a good belt of gin or similar. Cheers

    ReplyDelete
  33. It is Driver, Tony, just check out the spelling. Dead give away.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I honestly wonder why Driver and co think Thanet District council is the right forum for any discussion of such issues.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Of course it is not, Tony, for it is not within their remit and they should be concentrating on the pressing things they were elected to resolve.

    It is just another chance to raise the profile of the dynamic duo, animal rights currently taking a back seat now they have a new flag to wave.

    Sad things is, people elected them both in good faith and our council tax pays their allowances.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Err, hold on Ian and Tony, It wasn't me who called for anyone to be hanged!!

    If I did then it would be one of my tongue-in-cheek, spoof right-whinger comments, and if that's the case I suggest people obtain an Irony Detector when reading blog comments.

    Can anyone show me the comment so I can prove my innocence?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Here you go, I've found the offending statement:

    Gordon Bennett said...

    If that is the standard of debate from Worrow, he should be hung!

    See, it wasn't me!! Can I have an apology from Cllr Driver please. If I don't, I'll tell my Daddy!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Is this what they have planned for children... a normal family up bringing ?

    Family's anguish as they face THIRD forced adoption

    "A mum forced to give up her two kids for adoption by a gay couple wept last night as she told how her third baby has been offered to the same men."

    http://www.people.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/2012/04/01/family-s-anguish-as-they-face-third-forced-adoption-102039-23809562/

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anon 6:31, have you ever read through your comments. Always totally out of context, ruining the thread of debate and crushingly boring.

    Also, I do not work for GCHQ and I am not monitoring your postings for Goldman Sachs.

    Can't you do something interesting like gardening or maybe even emigrate. Enough is enough and you are a seriously dull bugger.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Difficult to counter the truth, eh James?

    I'm afraid the good old tory bluster is wearing a bit thin these days, you'll have to try a bit harder than that.

    You are correct about enough being enough, though; the resentment towards the twisted control freaks that run this country is building up a good head of steam.

    ReplyDelete
  41. James your not one of these dull little boring buggars are you ?
    We all wish they would emigrate and give us our country back, might not be politically correct but true ?

    UK Politics

    Tally of freemason judges revealed

    All judges wear wigs but their masonic links are more secret

    More than 200 judges and over 1,000 magistrates in the UK have owned up to being freemasons.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/211677.stm

    ReplyDelete
  42. In your dreams, sunshine.

    ReplyDelete
  43. @ Anonymous 6:31

    If you get your information via tabloids like The People then no wonder you're into daft conspiracies.

    (See my comment at the top of the thread as to why).

    ReplyDelete
  44. A young mother so petrified her unborn twin babies are going to be given to the same gay men who have received her previous children stolen for forced adoption that she is going to abort them through fear, and you call this a conspiracy, just because it appears in the "tabloid press" where would you be happy for it to appear instead Gordan Blimey ?

    Or would you prefer the truth to remain hidden from public view ?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Tony Faig, Gordon Bennet, Tom Clark et al be advised that some of the comments which have been posted/ allowed to be posted on this blogsite in relation to =marriage are offensive and abusive and motivated in my opinion by homopobia Be warned that you are sailing very close to to the wind and that action may be taken.


    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_home/hate_crime_domestic_violence_and_criminal_law/2639.asp

    ReplyDelete
  46. Tony Faig, Gordon Bennet, Tom Clark et al be advised that some of the comments which have been posted/ allowed to be posted on this blogsite in relation to =marriage are offensive and abusive and motivated in my opinion by homopobia Be warned that you are sailing very close to to the wind and that action may be taken.


    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_home/hate_crime_domestic_violence_and_criminal_law/2639.asp

    ReplyDelete
  47. At least some still care more about children than gay rights of adults.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I've just reported this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Ian, I thought John was going to employ "Blog Wardens" to keep an eye on us.

    Are you one of them?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Ian, this thread has nothing to do with homophobia or otherwise, as I am sure any half-way decent adjudicators will see for themselves.

    I think we have basically had it up to here with all this politically correct nonsense, and with damned good reason.

    We are not going to give up our country to a bunch of half-baked control freaks, without a fight.

    ReplyDelete
  51. @Ian Driver

    The best way to counter the sort of views you consider homophobic is through debate. Hateful opinions expressed in blogs, or the comments section, are normally ill-informed rants by people who are either bigotted or just plain irrational.

    The sort of comments in this thread that are, or border on, homophobic can easily be shown up as nonsense, if you have the ability and/or ammunition to do so.

    The majority of rants here are conspiracy-type rubbish, acquired from a narrow field of reference: namely the tabloids, far-right websites and the bloke down the pub. Show these people up for the idiots they are by providing a counter argument, don't threaten to have them prosecuted or whatever, that just plays into their hands. After all, I very much doubt the silly comments of Gordon Bennett, et al, will interest the cops.

    Tony Flaig, Tom Clarke, Peter Checksfield and co might sound at times like unreconstructed reactionaries but you can surely debate them reasonably without resorting to threats of "action being taken". Christ-on-a-bike, debating with that lot is a piece of cake! They're all bliddy daft old fools!

    ReplyDelete
  52. Various comments have been made following my original posting last week which appear inflammatory, for this reason I have deleted one comment.

    Also I have received six comments purportedly from Cllr Ian Driver, for this reason I shall seek to establish whether he is the author and will send an email to his Thanet District Council email account.

    In the meantime I'd point out that in 1600 plus posting by me, he will not find one homophobic comment written by me, nor have I added any to the 11,744 comments made on these pages.

    I often don't get time to respond to or even read comments, my post was published around 19:30 thursday I went to bed early got up early for work and returned late friday
    evening, I may have taken a quick scan saturday, however I didn't see or rather read the comment which I have subsequently deleted till lunch time sunday 1:40.

    I always consider carefully before deleting comments, which is why I waited until I had fully digested the bottle of wine at lunchtime.

    The contributor calling themselves "Cllr Ian Driver"

    "Tony you should be ashamed of yourself allowing idiots like Gordon Blimey

    "Tony I am disgusted by some of the postings you have allowed here

    Please note I have received no request from Cllr John Worrow to remove the comment which could have been placed by anyone, reading it, it clearly had been authored by someone perhaps wishing to create some mischief maybe some activist.

    Apologies to John Worrow and anyone else who may have been distressed, I do try and monitor comments but as John is aware I work long hours and cannot monitor comments 24/7.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Tony, I share few of your views and opinions, but I would agree that there is no evidence to support a claim that you are in any way homophobic, or that you have ever expressed views hostile to the LGBT community. Indeed, I recall past posts when you gave publicity to Thanet Pride.

    The local debate has exposed strong opinions, legitimately held, over the Government's equal marriage proposals. I happen to support the proposals, but I respect the opinions of those who don't.

    I don't respect the opinions, though, where they are based on (usually bible-fuelled) bigotry and hatred towards those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Many of those who have been commenting on local blogs fall firmly into that category, and it is disappointing to see blog-owners allowing comments to continue to appear. Thanet Life appears to think "poofter" is an acceptable term, whereas I can't believe an obviously racist comment would be allowed on the blog.

    The term "homophobic" has been banded about too freely, and the likes of Worrow and Driver have whipped up sentiment in a way that is not entirely helpful to the LGBT case.

    Equally, the continual stoking of the issue by the likes of Moores and his Tory Councillor colleagues, Wells and Kirby, with offensive personal jibes and attempted jokes, has seen the entire exchange descend into a rabble-rousing spectacle.

    And attempts to deny or twist facts - such as homosexuality being a natural condition and what is said in the Government's consultation document - by the likes of "Tom Clarke" and other self-confessed right-wing voters while, again, not homophobic, do raise questions about their personal motivation.

    Sadly, the example set by the ranting local MP, Mr Gale, is sure/calculated to inform such behaviour. With his offensive reference to those who campaign for equality as "militant homosexuals" and his lunatic, scare-mongering points about literary intrusion, and his anti-LGBT record, he has set out his own stall very clearly. His "militant christianity" seems to set his "principles" and is clearly an inspiration for many local bigots.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Tony thank you for removing the offending post. I am sure you agree that posts suggesting that Cllr Worrow is hanged are not conducive to democtratic debate. I accept that you are not able to constantly check content and appreciate your action. Ian

    ReplyDelete
  55. No apology for any childish innuendo then or indeed slurs suggesting homophobia, what a surprise, typical of what we've come to expect of Thanet councillors.

    Still nice to see both labour, conservative and independent agree on something, an unhealthy contempt for the electorate.

    I expect I will have to wait a while before I receive an apology a bit ironic given Ian Drivers previous stand on his former labour colleagues derogatory comments toward women.

    Also I did as I said I would and contacted councillor Driver by email asking him to verify the Ian Driver comments as his, at this point I've yet to get a verifiable reply from one of his email addresses, so I may be replying to some Muppet impersonating Ian driver

    ReplyDelete
  56. There are two sides to the inflaming of passions on this issue and perhaps we should all step back and take stock for a moment.

    Other than as a result of the conduct of the odd little thug, I think it fair to say that most folk are able to go about safely in Thanet regardless of their sexuality. One only has to look at the turnout for the Thanet Pride event to realise we can normally all live happily side by side.

    Unfortunately, some are not content with the status quo and have to push the boundaries. The real question then becomes precisely who is inciting what.

    I have written before that I feel this whole debate creates an unnecessary division and sets the LGBT community against many in the religious world. Are those like Gale and Wells who defend the religious interpretation the provocateurs or does that label belong to Worrow and Driver.

    It certainly does not help the debate when Cllr Driver then threatens action against some of us on his interpretation of what consitutes homophobia. Sadly that is typical of the extreme left of politics to which he subscribes.

    When you cannot win the debate you resort to bullyboy tactics and bluster and threaten. Well, all I would suggest to him is that he takes a long hard look in the mirror for, frankly, being all mouth and blubber he should scare no one.

    In conclusion may I also point out to this gentlemen that his anti royalist and anti religious rants from time to time are just as offensive to some as his perceived offence at some comments on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  57. PS see my last comment

    Of course I may have to offer the real Ian an apology in which case consider it done.

    And of course maybe Ian has better things to do at Easter, who knows or indeed cares.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Give it a rest Blimey, with your pontificating, you must be further behind the curve than most of us on this thread.

    Better go and get your nose into some history books, see if you can find out what the world is really all about, before it comes down on you like a ton of bricks.

    ReplyDelete
  59. "In conclusion may I also point out to this gentlemen that his anti royalist and anti religious rants from time to time are just as offensive to some as his perceived offence at some comments on this blog."

    But aren't those rants a part of Driver's spiel, to recruit useful marxist idiots for protests and such?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Guess you are right, Anon. Moseley had his black shirts so why shouldnt Driver have his pink version.

    ReplyDelete
  61. @STFU Gordon Blimey
    "Give it a rest Blimey, with your pontificating, you must be further behind the curve than most of us on this thread."

    How's that then Big Guy? Because I don't subscribe to a right-wing blowhard version of events? Or is that I've touched a raw nerve and you have no way of responding with anything constructive?

    "Better go and get your nose into some history books, see if you can find out what the world is really all about, before it comes down on you like a ton of bricks."

    What history books would you like me to read then matey boy? Something by David Irving no doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  62. "Because I don't subscribe to a right-wing blowhard version of events? Or is that I've touched a raw nerve and you have no way of responding with anything constructive?"

    No, it's because your cluelessness is embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete
  63. LOL @10:22, but so true.

    You were right, when you posted on the other thread, the other day, that this would happen.

    ReplyDelete
  64. @anon 11:10

    "No, it's because your cluelessness is embarrassing."

    Pray tell me how I'm clueless Oh Enlightened One?

    More like I've wound you up because you're a tabloid-reading right-whinger. As it's my schtick to get the goat of you people I think I've pretty much succeeded. Unless you can debate me like an informed, clued up adult then I suggest you STFU!

    ReplyDelete
  65. @Blimey, when you become one, I will debate you.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Homosexual Weddings

    I have had a think and i have questions-
    Who is going to wear the white dress?
    If there is no bride therefore no bridesmaids,who is going
    sleep with the best man?
    Which side do people sit on?
    If there is no bouquet,how do we know who is getting married next?
    Will any hotels let them have the honeymoon suite?
    Will the ring be on a finger or round the wrist?
    I have a few ideas for the dinner menu,anyone else?

    ReplyDelete
  67. OMG, Anon, the blog wardens have all just had fits at your posting whilst ID is consulting the Stonewall manual on hate crime, seeing just how many charges you are to face. Have you not yet realised that humour in the UK is now banned and only minorities have any rights.

    Hope my reference to OMG did not offend. I would have started with the exclamation, Holy Shit, but I thought that might turn some people on (or off) as the case may be.

    ReplyDelete
  68. They'll be wanting to take down our particulars next!!!

    ReplyDelete
  69. Actually your pathetic humour just shows you up as a bunch if ignorant fuck-wits.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Presumab;y someone who sticks his member in his ear and lubricates his brain?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Since time began people have made up sex orientated jokes and seaside spots like ours were famous for their saucy postcards. These, of course, had, to use the modern idiom, a straight slant and were perfectly acceptable.

    Conversely, tell a joke with a homosexual suggestion and, like wow, the excreta hits the fan. You are either homophobic or a fuck-wit.

    Why is this, one might ask? After all, are they not clamouring for equality? Did their own community comedians not tell jokes about gay days? Just why are they so sensitive or does the hormone make up strip one of that legendary British sense of humour?

    I thought the wedding joke was quite amusing and the taking down of particulars is in every seaside gag book. So come on, 7:03, lighten up and crack your face a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Any humour on this subject is better than the whinging by certain people on a subject that has nothing to do with TDC and should only be debated at County Hall level and above.

    ReplyDelete
  73. You're generalising Tom... Not all gay people lack a sense of humour (please don't judge us all by the like of Worrow & Driver!). I wish we still had people like Dick Emery ("Ooh you are awful!") or Cannon & Ball ("He's a wooly woofter Tommy!") making light of things.

    ReplyDelete
  74. humour is good ... but who says that certain subjects should only be debated at County Hall level , the very subjects that are being kept hidden are the ones that must be debated at all levels inorder to end this dictatorship posing as government

    ReplyDelete
  75. It seems sensible to knock this strand of comment on the head, before anyone else is offended, certainly I take from this debate,the though we are in an age when special interest groups are willing to use every angle and nuance of the law, to censor free flowing debate, yes at least one comment clearly overstepped the bounds of decency, however it's clear that one contributor, was quite happy to make capital, while at the same time, themselves make offensive accusations.

    ReplyDelete