UKIP First 100 Days WTF!!!

[Scuffers]

eccles said:

Scuffers said:

FWIW, I have the same contempt for the Hacked-off morons, which if they had half a brain, would have either set a password or not used a public voicemail system.

So if you don't lock your house it's perfectly alright for me to come in rifle through your stuff and read your mail?

No, but to use a more accurate analogy, if you leave your keys in your car and it's stolen, will the insurance pay out?

Or better still, if you walk down the road with a bar of gold in your hand, you would not be surprised if you get mugged.

Neither are right, but they will still happen in reality.

You bring up security, ok, this is exactly what's wrong with people today, they have no concept of digital security, then start crying when they get done over.

[JensenA]

eccles said:

Scuffers said:

FWIW, I have the same contempt for the Hacked-off morons, which if they had half a brain, would have either set a password or not used a public voicemail system.

So if you don't lock your house it's perfectly alright for me to come in rifle through your stuff and read your mail?

I'm not answering on Scuffers behalf, but I understand the point he was making, and I'm sure you do too. But for what it's worth, I don't think your insurance company or the police, would have much sympathy with you if you told them you had left your house unlocked.

[TKF]

Scuffers said:

eccles said:

Scuffers said:

FWIW, I have the same contempt for the Hacked-off morons, which if they had half a brain, would have either set a password or not used a public voicemail system.

So if you don't lock your house it's perfectly alright for me to come in rifle through your stuff and read your mail?

No, but to use a more accurate analogy, if you leave your keys in your car and it's stolen, will the insurance pay out?

Or better still, if you walk down the road with a bar of gold in your hand, you would not be surprised if you get mugged.

Neither are right, but they will still happen in reality.

You bring up security, ok, this is exactly what's wrong with people today, they have no concept of digital security, then start crying when they get done over.

Too right. That stupid bh Milly Dowler, eh?

[Yazar]

^^^ inappropriate language.

[Scuffers]

TKF said:

Too right. That stupid bh Milly Dowler, eh?

I don't remember Milly Dowler getting on her high horse about it do you?

in the cold light of day, all the accusations made about them deleting messages etc were never backed up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Milly_Dowle...

no, what they did was not right, but being objective, they were investigating a valid story (as opposed to just trying to get tittle tattle).

No, I am not defending phone hacking in any way, BUT, it's hardly crime of the century and like I said, if your messages are that important to you, at the very least, set a password!

to this day, I am still gobsmacked that when Gordon Brown became PM, the security services did not take his phone off him and give him a secured one to use, talk about a total laps in security.

[allergictocheese]

Scuffers said:

talk about a total laps in security.

Ever get the feeling you're going around in circles?

[Scuffers]

allergictocheese said:

Scuffers said:

talk about a total laps in security.

Ever get the feeling you're going around in circles?

Eh?

Come again?

[allergictocheese]

Scuffers said:

Eh?

Come again?

Is it a race?

[don4l]

TKF said:

Too right. <snip>

Dear me.

A new depth has been plumbed.

Why do people think that it is OK to use murder victims to further their cause?

I despair.

I don't use the "report" button, but I suspect that many people will.

Hopefully, we won't see any more of TKF in NPE.

I've deliberately snipped all reference to the victim, and I will delete this post if TKF deletes his post.

[Axionknight]

Scuffers said:

Eh?

Come again?

The word is lapse, not laps.

[968]

don4l said:

Dear me.

A new depth has been plumbed.

Why do people think that it is OK to use murder victims to further their cause?

I despair.

I don't use the "report" button, but I suspect that many people will.

Hopefully, we won't see any more of TKF in NPE.

I've deliberately snipped all reference to the victim, and I will delete this post if TKF deletes his post.

Funny that, because I didn't see your righteous indignation when dandarez used the death of Alice Gross to make a cheap political point about immigration, despite the parents asking specifically for this not to occur.

[don4l]

968 said:

don4l said:

Dear me.

A new depth has been plumbed.

Why do people think that it is OK to use murder victims to further their cause?

I despair.

I don't use the "report" button, but I suspect that many people will.

Hopefully, we won't see any more of TKF in NPE.

I've deliberately snipped all reference to the victim, and I will delete this post if TKF deletes his post.

Funny that, because I didn't see your righteous indignation when dandarez used the death of Alice Gross to make a cheap political point about immigration, despite the parents asking specifically for this not to occur.

So you find it acceptable to use the death of a murder victim in support of your political cause.

Well done you.

If a political issue is leading to deaths, then it should be addressed. However, when a victim is totally unrelated to a political issue, then they should be allowed to rest in peace.

[968]

don4l said:

So you find it acceptable to use the death of a murder victim in support of your political cause.

Well done you.

If a political issue is leading to deaths, then it should be addressed. However, when a victim is totally unrelated to a political issue, then they should be allowed to rest in peace.

No, actually I don't think its right but you are such a self serving hypocrit, you didn't choose to criticise your fellow ukiper who made a cheap point about the death of a girl, despite the specific wishes of her family. That is not 'fair game' and neither is Milly Dowler, but you will only criticise what is convenient because you're a hypocrit.

[dandarez]

968 said:

don4l said:

Dear me.

A new depth has been plumbed.

Why do people think that it is OK to use murder victims to further their cause?

I despair.

I don't use the "report" button, but I suspect that many people will.

Hopefully, we won't see any more of TKF in NPE.

I've deliberately snipped all reference to the victim, and I will delete this post if TKF deletes his post.

Funny that, because I didn't see your righteous indignation when dandarez used the death of Alice Gross to make a cheap political point about immigration, despite the parents asking specifically for this not to occur.

That's ambiguously worded - I can't recall her parents ever asking me personally to do anything.
And there was nothing cheap about it, only in your eyes.

Her parents believe in the Human Rights Convention, which they are entirely entitled to do. I am not totally against it but my god there is some muddled thinking with masses of it.

What I'm against is open borders which allows a known murderer like him to walk in willy nilly. If we are to let people in, then VET them!

How different is the view by the immigrant, Radoslav Andric, who owned the house where the Latvian lived.

'It was terrible he was let into this country, people should have known he was a convicted murderer.'

Sums it up in one sentence.

[don4l]

968 said:

don4l said:

So you find it acceptable to use the death of a murder victim in support of your political cause.

Well done you.

If a political issue is leading to deaths, then it should be addressed. However, when a victim is totally unrelated to a political issue, then they should be allowed to rest in peace.

No, actually I don't think its right but you are such a self serving hypocrit, you didn't choose to criticise your fellow ukiper who made a cheap point about the death of a girl, despite the specific wishes of her family. That is not 'fair game' and neither is <snip>, but you will only criticise what is convenient because you're a hypocrit.

You seem to be under the impression that I read every post on these threads. This is not true.

I don't know if I saw the post in question, or not. However, as I never heard of the person in question, it is possible that I didn't understand the post.

I note that I had to snip your post to remove the name of the victim. This suggests that you are also happy to use murder victims to further your cause. If anybody else wants to disagree with me, please do not name the victim.

I will repeat the offer that I made to TKF. If you delete your post which named the victim, then I will also delete this reply.

[dandarez]

968 said:

don4l said:

So you find it acceptable to use the death of a murder victim in support of your political cause.

Well done you.

If a political issue is leading to deaths, then it should be addressed. However, when a victim is totally unrelated to a political issue, then they should be allowed to rest in peace.

No, actually I don't think its right but you are such a self serving hypocrit, you didn't choose to criticise your fellow ukiper who made a cheap point about the death of a girl, despite the specific wishes of her family. That is not 'fair game' and neither is Milly Dowler, but you will only criticise what is convenient because you're a hypocrit.

Hypocrit? and twice.

Learn to spell.

[968]

don4l said:

You seem to be under the impression that I read every post on these threads. This is not true.

I don't know if I saw the post in question, or not. However, as I never heard of the person in question, it is possible that I didn't understand the post.

I note that I had to snip your post to remove the name of the victim. This suggests that you are also happy to use murder victims to further your cause. If anybody else wants to disagree with me, please do not name the victim.

I will repeat the offer that I made to TKF. If you delete your post which named the victim, then I will also delete this reply.

Don't try to play the honourable here. You are a hypocrite plain and simple. You contributed to the other thread but wouldn't dare to criticise one of your fellow ukipers for their shameful lack of respect and shameful opportunism simply to make a point. I criticised him straight away, did you? Naming the victim is simply contextualising my response not making a point about the story. Perhaps with your new found principles, you might want to examine what dandarez has written and apply the standards you seem to hold others to, and apply them to him? I doubt you will because like most on these threads, you're spineless and in reality have no principles.

[968]

dandarez said:

Hypocrit? and twice.

Learn to spell.

My word. Dishonourable and pathetically pedantic.

[dandarez]

968 said:

dandarez said:

Hypocrit? and twice.

Learn to spell.

My word. Dishonourable and pathetically pedantic.

Ha ha. Did you double-check before posting that?

Standards, my friend (not really), are extremely important.

Now falling like Rome's Colosseum.

[968]

dandarez said:

Ha ha. Did you double-check before posting that?

Standards, my friend (not really), are extremely important.

Now falling like Rome's Colosseum.

Is that the level of your argument? It's quite sad actually that you have so little argument that you focus on a spelling mistake of a post constructed on an iPhone. I'm glad it's providing you with some solace, given how despicable yours and the other posters position and how deep your hypocrisy.