Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Want To Get REALLY Wound UP????

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10 October 2006, 11:22 PM
  #31  
SlimJ_2005
Scooby Regular
 
SlimJ_2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Stop giving out benefits for having children, only allow people to have kids when they can afford to have them (or otherwise they will be adopted).

This will stop this friggin mess...

Oh, and stop the mass unwashed/unemployed voting so the government parties cannot aim their campaign at them for easy votes!!

Sorted
Old 10 October 2006, 11:44 PM
  #32  
Jay m A
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
Jay m A's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

^^
thats more right wing that Beckham, lol
Old 11 October 2006, 06:50 AM
  #33  
Iwan
Scooby Regular
 
Iwan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SlimJ_2005
Oh, and stop the mass unwashed/unemployed voting so the government parties cannot aim their campaign at them for easy votes!!

Sorted
Gets the nod from me. If you don't contribute to society they should stop your benefits and your right to vote. That would a) stop these scummers claiming and living like the parasitic leeches they are, and b) stop Labour ever getting in power again.

Oh, and putting bromide/arsenic in the water supply to certain parts of some cities might be a good idea too. Or just napalming them.
Old 11 October 2006, 08:31 AM
  #35  
lozgti
Scooby Regular
 
lozgti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Most young men will leg it as soon as they hear the word 'pregnant' as did most of the fathers in this.

The girl hasn't had a chance to live any of her life either.Her problem I accept (don't accept anyones argument that kids now don't understand the risks,in fact more so seeing as they dress to look 18 at the age of 13)

Only people I feel sorry for are the babies.Instantly born into a ruined life.No stable family.

That girl's mobile phone seemed far more important to her than the little human being she wanted nothing to do with,

Last edited by lozgti; 11 October 2006 at 11:05 AM.
Old 11 October 2006, 10:06 AM
  #36  
alcazar
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
alcazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rl'yeh
Posts: 40,781
Received 27 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pslewis
They were getting paid in the Tory years so don't come that crap with me!!

Pete
Oh come now, Pete. even YOU can remember that the Tories didn't START that little lot, it was introduced under Labour, continued under the Tories and EXPANDED and INCREASED massively by this lot;rolleyes: In 1998, in fact, one of the FIRST things they did

BBC NEWS | Business | Q&A: Child benefit

Alcazar
Old 11 October 2006, 11:00 AM
  #37  
SCOsazOBY
Scooby Senior
 
SCOsazOBY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well they are all paying the price of not keeping their legs shut now!
The 13 year old had originally been sent into care because of behaviour problems then came back hiding her pregnancy so it was obvious she didnt want anything to do with her baby as she hasnt grown up herself yet.
Old 11 October 2006, 11:33 AM
  #38  
Leslie
Scooby Regular
 
Leslie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

PSL!

Why has your glorious leader not done anything to stop the appalling drop in standards to gutter level which have occurred over the last 10 years or so.

Why has he encouraged the loss of the basic family which used to bring children up properly with the best chance of furthering themselves as was always the case, even in Attlee's government?

Why has he shirked his "Tough on Crime" claims and run out of prison space thus encouraging the further spread of viciously violent crime?

When do you think he might actually do anything rather than blather about it in an effort to impress us which might be good for the electorate of this country who are the ones generating this country's wealth and are being taxed shamefully and see their taxes being pissed against the wall?

Les

Last edited by Leslie; 12 October 2006 at 11:13 AM.
Old 11 October 2006, 11:48 AM
  #39  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Just been talking about this in work. I missed it but sounds very worrying.

As a father of a 4 year old girl, its very worrying to see this sort of thing happening. Although I agree 100% this free housing and money needs to be stopped before the country finally goes down the ****ter, its just so easy to pick female losers with nothing going for them for a show such as that.

What about the ones that have no intention whatsoever to get themselves pregnant the first chance they get or even to have sex at an early age, yet occasionally it still happens. Dont see any of that on TV.

I'm making every effort to ensure my daughter doesn't make these mistakes and attempt to install the need to do other things first - education, travel etc etc. If I have anything to do with it, she won't grow up around these benefit vampires (of which some of her mothers family are sadly) but the worry that she might make a mistake will be there in a dozen years time.

I'd rather see a program about the parents of girls that get pregnant but who are brought up in a lower-middle/upper working (whatever you want to call it) class environment.
Old 11 October 2006, 01:27 PM
  #41  
Sport160
Scooby Regular
 
Sport160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: W Sussex
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pslewis
3 BROWN babies ............ and the dad doesn't want to know - what a fooookin surprise!!

Pete
Offensive, even by your own normal standards Pete.
Old 11 October 2006, 05:40 PM
  #42  
p1mark
Scooby Regular
 
p1mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: In a 405 BHP/360 ft/lb P1 with SN superstar Sonic dog at my side!
Posts: 1,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pslewis
At 12 I was only interested in Shaggy the Hippy ... not ******** the Kid!!

Pete
Scooby doo first appeared in 1969. You claim to be 78. Therefore the earliest you could have been watching it was at the age of 41!

Another slip up old man!
Old 11 October 2006, 07:06 PM
  #43  
pslewis
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
pslewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Old Codgers Home
Posts: 32,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Sport160
Offensive, even by your own normal standards Pete.
Explain??????????????

Pete
Old 11 October 2006, 08:31 PM
  #44  
Ted Maul
Scooby Regular
 
Ted Maul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London Town
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pslewis
Explain??????????????

Pete
you know full well. Trying to act confused doesn't wash
Old 11 October 2006, 08:42 PM
  #45  
simpsons !
Scooby Regular
 
simpsons !'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: A Yorkshireman living in Lancashire, Recruiting for the War of the Roses part deux!
Posts: 945
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ted Maul
you know full well. Trying to act confused doesn't wash
He is often confused and does not wash
Old 11 October 2006, 10:04 PM
  #46  
pslewis
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
pslewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Old Codgers Home
Posts: 32,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The girl had 3 brown babies - FACT

The Father wasn't around - FACT

These Young Fathers usually **** off - FACT

Cannot see what the issue is??

Hence - please explain to me why it was offensive??

Go and **** off you PC Brigade members!!

Pete
Old 12 October 2006, 09:49 AM
  #47  
Sport160
Scooby Regular
 
Sport160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: W Sussex
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Pete,

What you wrote was offensive, you don't need me to explain why, you know full well. I'm surprised, normally I expect you to stand behind your posts not try to squirm out them.

Cheers
Old 12 October 2006, 09:57 AM
  #48  
sociopath
BANNED
 
sociopath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: www.flamingmorons.co.uk
Posts: 911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Apparently it is 'offensive' to use a colour specific adjective to describe someone now.

If the babies were brown they were brown so get the **** over it.

Your username is in blue.... 'blue Sport160'. Be offended.... very offended.
Old 12 October 2006, 11:14 AM
  #49  
Leslie
Scooby Regular
 
Leslie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Too difficult to answer yet again PSL, since you are ducking my questions.

Les
Old 12 October 2006, 11:21 AM
  #50  
Sbradley
Scooby Regular
 
Sbradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Croydon - returned to democracy! Yay!!
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sociopath
Apparently it is 'offensive' to use a colour specific adjective to describe someone now.

If the babies were brown they were brown so get the **** over it.

Your username is in blue.... 'blue Sport160'. Be offended.... very offended.
PSL Stressed that the babies were brown and that it was no surprise the fathers weren't interested.

No issue with the babies being brown. No issue with the fathers not being interested. Both of these are facts.

Big issue with the EMPHASIS being on brown and the direct implication being that the fathers were black and this is why they weren't interested.

THAT is what made the post offensive, even by Pete's normally low standards.

SB
Old 12 October 2006, 02:30 PM
  #51  
shustir
Scooby Regular
 
shustir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well put SB

The number of people on this board obsessed with colour of skin is alarming.
Old 12 October 2006, 03:40 PM
  #52  
logiclee
Scooby Regular
 
logiclee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 4,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well I didn't pick Pete's post up as racist, just a slur on the no hope fathers.

Perhaps those who picked it up as racist have the issues.

Cheers
Lee
Old 12 October 2006, 04:05 PM
  #53  
lucylastic
Scooby Regular
 
lucylastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by logiclee
Well I didn't pick Pete's post up as racist, just a slur on the no hope fathers.

Perhaps those who picked it up as racist have the issues.

Cheers
Lee
So the fact that the only word in capitals in his post was the word BROWN, wouldn't lead you to believe he was stressing the relevance of the colour of the babies then?
Old 12 October 2006, 04:15 PM
  #54  
Paul3446
Scooby Regular
 
Paul3446's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
"Scooby doo first appeared in 1969. You claim to be 78. Therefore the earliest you could have been watching it was at the age of 41!

Another slip up old man!"



More importantly Pete, can you answet this question about your age, or will you just ignore it now that you realise you've dropped yourself right in it again.
Old 12 October 2006, 04:15 PM
  #55  
DCI Gene Hunt
Scooby Senior
 
DCI Gene Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Talking

Well FFS this IS scoobynet......... not a feckin BLUE Peter Fan Forum.... We need to strike that balance with racist undertones where colour is concerned, and well IF someone refers to it.... let it go! rather than discuss the whole pathetic thing for another three pages!!!!

Anyway they were more 'CARAMEL' than 'BROWN'....... which explains EVERYTHING.... kebab anyone
Old 12 October 2006, 05:41 PM
  #56  
lucylastic
Scooby Regular
 
lucylastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by DCI Gene Hunt
Well FFS this IS scoobynet......... not a feckin BLUE Peter Fan Forum.... We need to strike that balance with racist undertones where colour is concerned, and well IF someone refers to it.... let it go! rather than discuss the whole pathetic thing for another three pages!!!!
Don't disagree with you, just irritated me that someone thought there was no relevance to the colour in the original statement, when there blatantly was. And no thanks, no kebab for me
Old 12 October 2006, 05:55 PM
  #57  
_RIP_
BANNED
 
_RIP_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by p1mark
Scooby doo first appeared in 1969. You claim to be 78. Therefore the earliest you could have been watching it was at the age of 41!

Another slip up old man!
Well spotted. Pity the sad loser wont answer this one. I wonder why
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
alcazar
Non Scooby Related
25
11 September 2015 08:45 PM
swan
Non Scooby Related
4
14 December 2002 09:22 PM



Quick Reply: Want To Get REALLY Wound UP????



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34 PM.