The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Disgusting, it really is.
Original Message posted by ßulle†† Yesterday at 12.14PM Original Message
There are 27 replies
Drunk Illegal Immigrant, driving with no license or insurance, knocks down and kills a child and only gets..
8 weeks
And he's still in the Country, despite being here illegally.
Hurrah for justice.
After reading this post it made me want to know what you all think about illegal immigrants. I think it is wrong and because Britain used to be a strong dominating country should stand strong now and make sure no forign immigrants get into the UK. Look what what happens when they get in...
Original Message posted by ßulle†† Yesterday at 12.14PM Original Message
There are 27 replies
Drunk Illegal Immigrant, driving with no license or insurance, knocks down and kills a child and only gets..
8 weeks
And he's still in the Country, despite being here illegally.
Hurrah for justice.
After reading this post it made me want to know what you all think about illegal immigrants. I think it is wrong and because Britain used to be a strong dominating country should stand strong now and make sure no forign immigrants get into the UK. Look what what happens when they get in...
Page:
He's still got nothing on Forest Fan.
You're walking in a shadow, kev.
You're walking in a shadow, kev.
Grix Thraves wrote:
> 24...?
>
> I worry for my future.
Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in prooving you all wrong.
> 24...?
>
> I worry for my future.
Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in prooving you all wrong.
kevstar wrote:
> You havn't a clue! What, doesn't that worry you in some way shape or
> form. I'll answer that for you shall I considering you havn't a clue.
> Well I can tell you it's because most of them appeal wouldn't you
> agree? And when there waiting for there appeals, it's known some just
> vanish, or didn't you have a clue about either.
"It's known"?
I think Light was saying that he didn't know and that he didn't have enough proof to back up what he could judge from the situation (could be wrong). You, on the other hand, are still happy using your immature assumptions to try and prove others wrong. Light admits he doesn't have enough evidence on the situation, and so you... assume. You don't appear to know anything about it at all (no surprise) - where's your evidence and proof? "It's known" isn't going to cut it, Kevin.
Oh, and... immigration system in your own words?
> You havn't a clue! What, doesn't that worry you in some way shape or
> form. I'll answer that for you shall I considering you havn't a clue.
> Well I can tell you it's because most of them appeal wouldn't you
> agree? And when there waiting for there appeals, it's known some just
> vanish, or didn't you have a clue about either.
"It's known"?
I think Light was saying that he didn't know and that he didn't have enough proof to back up what he could judge from the situation (could be wrong). You, on the other hand, are still happy using your immature assumptions to try and prove others wrong. Light admits he doesn't have enough evidence on the situation, and so you... assume. You don't appear to know anything about it at all (no surprise) - where's your evidence and proof? "It's known" isn't going to cut it, Kevin.
Oh, and... immigration system in your own words?
I was just perusing the Daily Mail forums.
I'm going to be sick.
I'm going to be sick.
kevstar wrote:
> Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because
> i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in
> prooving you all wrong.
To be honest, I think we've overestimated your abilities in terms of arguing a point, which is why you're being mocked so badly.
By the way, how does your age have difference in terms of being underestimated?
> Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because
> i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in
> prooving you all wrong.
To be honest, I think we've overestimated your abilities in terms of arguing a point, which is why you're being mocked so badly.
By the way, how does your age have difference in terms of being underestimated?
kevstar wrote:
> Wrong, the link I showed had nothing to do with the £2 billion
> crap, but rather to show the graph of inactive immigrants came to
> more than what the British people were inactive wise. Then it was you
> who turned it into the £2 billion profit, so thats where I get
> it from, happy?
I do so love it when you demonstrate that you don't even understand your own argument...
This; [URL]http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/occ77migrant.pdf[/URL] is the link you first posted, before you wailed about how the graph proved darkies are evil.
Have a look at page 17 kevstar. Where it says "Net fiscal contribution of £2.5 billion". Not my words kevstar; the words of the report you linked to.
Do you see? Or would you like to tell a few more lies to try and pull yourself out of this one?
>
>
> You havn't a clue! What, doesn't that worry you in some way shape or
> form. I'll answer that for you shall I considering you havn't a clue.
> Well I can tell you it's because most of them appeal wouldn't you
> agree? And when there waiting for there appeals, it's known some just
> vanish, or didn't you have a clue about either.
No. It's just that I prefer to seek my information from someone who isn't a racist liar. Because, you see, you've proven you're a racist and you've shown you're a liar. Therefore, I don't accept what you have to say as gospel truth. I treat it as the biased ravings of an inarticulate scrotal mite. Do you see?
> Wrong, the link I showed had nothing to do with the £2 billion
> crap, but rather to show the graph of inactive immigrants came to
> more than what the British people were inactive wise. Then it was you
> who turned it into the £2 billion profit, so thats where I get
> it from, happy?
I do so love it when you demonstrate that you don't even understand your own argument...
This; [URL]http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/occ77migrant.pdf[/URL] is the link you first posted, before you wailed about how the graph proved darkies are evil.
Have a look at page 17 kevstar. Where it says "Net fiscal contribution of £2.5 billion". Not my words kevstar; the words of the report you linked to.
Do you see? Or would you like to tell a few more lies to try and pull yourself out of this one?
>
>
> You havn't a clue! What, doesn't that worry you in some way shape or
> form. I'll answer that for you shall I considering you havn't a clue.
> Well I can tell you it's because most of them appeal wouldn't you
> agree? And when there waiting for there appeals, it's known some just
> vanish, or didn't you have a clue about either.
No. It's just that I prefer to seek my information from someone who isn't a racist liar. Because, you see, you've proven you're a racist and you've shown you're a liar. Therefore, I don't accept what you have to say as gospel truth. I treat it as the biased ravings of an inarticulate scrotal mite. Do you see?
kevstar wrote:
"Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in prooving you all wrong."
Why, because you're acting like a 9 year old? I've said it before and I'll say it again, go shoot yourself, now.
"Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in prooving you all wrong."
Why, because you're acting like a 9 year old? I've said it before and I'll say it again, go shoot yourself, now.
kevstar wrote:
> Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because
> i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in
> prooving you all wrong.
Heh. Is that in the same way that Mike Tyson would be at a disadvantage in a fight with Kylie Minogue?
You're not being underestimated kevin. You're being patronised. And laughed at. It's sweet how you think you're being taken seriously, but you're here for entertainment value. Sorry to ruin your little fantasy...
Incidentally, I posted the letter to the DSS yesterday. I don't imagine for an instant it'll lead to anything, but it's a letter on your file kevstar. Should be interesting the next time you have to go to court to defraud the DSS.
> Try 25, i'm obviously at a advantge here isn't I? Why, well because
> i'm the one bieng underestimated, which gives me great pleasure in
> prooving you all wrong.
Heh. Is that in the same way that Mike Tyson would be at a disadvantage in a fight with Kylie Minogue?
You're not being underestimated kevin. You're being patronised. And laughed at. It's sweet how you think you're being taken seriously, but you're here for entertainment value. Sorry to ruin your little fantasy...
Incidentally, I posted the letter to the DSS yesterday. I don't imagine for an instant it'll lead to anything, but it's a letter on your file kevstar. Should be interesting the next time you have to go to court to defraud the DSS.
Jim of Honor wrote:
> I think Light was saying that he didn't know and that he didn't have
> enough proof to back up what he could judge from the situation (could
> be wrong). You, on the other hand, are still happy using your
> immature assumptions to try and prove others wrong.
Spot on.
> I think Light was saying that he didn't know and that he didn't have
> enough proof to back up what he could judge from the situation (could
> be wrong). You, on the other hand, are still happy using your
> immature assumptions to try and prove others wrong.
Spot on.
Jim of Honor wrote:
> kevstar wrote:
> Jim of Honor wrote:
> Jim of Honor wrote:
> Sorry Kevin, but you need to either:
>
> a.) explain the immigration system in your own words, or
> b.) explain why not doing so doesn't completely undermine your
> argument.
>
> Read particularly, "OWN WORDS", not copied and pasted
> because someone else has done some of the work for you.
>
> Why exactly, do you know it? then you tell me. If you don't know it
> then according to your logic it makes your arguments for immigration
> as pointless as mine doesn't it?
>
> Look Kev, you keep missing the point. You said you came on here to
> show the system has failings. To do so you have to know what the
> system is, in order to show how it's failing to meet its targets,
Hahahahahah, you havn't a clue do you, you try and come on here thinking you know it all, but you don't have a clue do you. Right lets get this straight, the foriegn language courses where they uncovered more illegal courses than what was legal. Are you suggesting I need to know the system to say that isn't an example of the system bieng abused? This is why I don't need to know the system, but rather the failings in the system. And you do know he done the same thing down South, only a year earlier, don't you.
> aims etc. But you haven't, so your points exist in some bigoted,
> ugly void. The point isn't whether I know the immigration system,
> I'm just trying to point out what a racist bloke you are and how you
> seem to get so much wrong on this subject.
So please with the answer I gave above there, could you explain how I seem to get so much wrong, such as.
>
> And yes, I could indeed tell you my interpretation of the immigration
> system, and I'd be happy to once you've done so, as you were asked
> first.
Really cos I don't think you can, I for one don't know the full system, I admit it, like I have done many times. Would you now like to explain please as you obviously claim you know.
> kevstar wrote:
> Jim of Honor wrote:
> Jim of Honor wrote:
> Sorry Kevin, but you need to either:
>
> a.) explain the immigration system in your own words, or
> b.) explain why not doing so doesn't completely undermine your
> argument.
>
> Read particularly, "OWN WORDS", not copied and pasted
> because someone else has done some of the work for you.
>
> Why exactly, do you know it? then you tell me. If you don't know it
> then according to your logic it makes your arguments for immigration
> as pointless as mine doesn't it?
>
> Look Kev, you keep missing the point. You said you came on here to
> show the system has failings. To do so you have to know what the
> system is, in order to show how it's failing to meet its targets,
Hahahahahah, you havn't a clue do you, you try and come on here thinking you know it all, but you don't have a clue do you. Right lets get this straight, the foriegn language courses where they uncovered more illegal courses than what was legal. Are you suggesting I need to know the system to say that isn't an example of the system bieng abused? This is why I don't need to know the system, but rather the failings in the system. And you do know he done the same thing down South, only a year earlier, don't you.
> aims etc. But you haven't, so your points exist in some bigoted,
> ugly void. The point isn't whether I know the immigration system,
> I'm just trying to point out what a racist bloke you are and how you
> seem to get so much wrong on this subject.
So please with the answer I gave above there, could you explain how I seem to get so much wrong, such as.
>
> And yes, I could indeed tell you my interpretation of the immigration
> system, and I'd be happy to once you've done so, as you were asked
> first.
Really cos I don't think you can, I for one don't know the full system, I admit it, like I have done many times. Would you now like to explain please as you obviously claim you know.
Page: