There are exceptions but most non-EU migrants cannot claim benefits including jobseekers’ allowance and tax credits. The support for asylum seekers that you appear to be referring to amounts to around £5 a day and only a small number of migrants are able to claim this and very few of those at Calais would be eligible.
True - they have to wait until they get to Kent - as most seem to be able to do .All asylum seekers are able to claim .
..and if anyone does dare to have a different (and more valid opinion) he becomes petulant and whiny and then cuts them off having tried his best to humiliate them. Then repeats that no one can come up with an answer... other than his.
Have stopped listening to him I am afraid. His good points used to outweigh the bad but he seems to have turned into an immature egoist so now I happily subscribe to podcasts and catch up with Nick A.
Incidentally..has he had some dental work done? In preparation for his burgeoning TV career? Seems to have the same problem as Cristo-cant swallow which is so annoying.
Well, in the other board where people laugh at me for being a Gaunty fan, I'll go so far to say that the way James O'BORING speaks down to you and tries to belittle you, I despise him as much as the people commenting on my board seem to despise Gaunty, so other side of the fence.
..and if anyone does dare to have a different (and more valid opinion) he becomes petulant and whiny and then cuts them off having tried his best to humiliate them. Then repeats that no one can come up with an answer.
He doesn't cut them off, he questions them and he argues with them occasional. If people can't give him an answer it shows how week their argument is.
Well, in the other board where people laugh at me for being a Gaunty fan, I'll go so far to say that the way James O'BORING speaks down to you and tries to belittle you, I despise him as much as the people commenting on my board seem to despise Gaunty, so other side of the fence.
Interesting. I was listening when Gaunt blew it on Talk Sport and I was one of many who complained to Ofcom. I was happy to see him go. IMO Gobber is heading the same way although I think someone has had a word in his ear recently as he is becoming a little obsequious.
If he has to go to an ad break or news they have to go but, he doesn't cut them off mid sentence. He also can't let people go on for 5 or 10 mins as that would be unfair too.
Gaunt would just cut someone off when they started speaking and would always cut callers off when he was losing the argument.
Heard the beginning of Allen's show this morning. I find his attitude towards people who claim abuse in childhood by famous figures totally disgusting. Of course we know things "have to be proved", you hateful moron. He questioned again how a child could recognise a famous politician, Edward Heath in this case. He appears to think that people's memories are wiped when they become adults. I always knew Allen was thick and when he's talking about things like this, he just proves just how thick.
Allen's reluctance to give any sympathy and minimal credence to victims of abuse by famous people makes me wonder about him, a lot.
Heard the beginning of Allen's show this morning. I find his attitude towards people who claim abuse in childhood by famous figures totally disgusting. Of course we know things "have to be proved", you hateful moron. He questioned again how a child could recognise a famous politician, Edward Heath in this case. He appears to think that people's memories are wiped when they become adults. I always knew Allen was thick and when he's talking about things like this, he just proves just how thick.
Allen's reluctance to give any sympathy and minimal credence to victims of abuse by famous people makes me wonder about him, a lot.
Heard the beginning of Allen's show this morning. I find his attitude towards people who claim abuse in childhood by famous figures totally disgusting. Of course we know things "have to be proved", you hateful moron. He questioned again how a child could recognise a famous politician, Edward Heath in this case. He appears to think that people's memories are wiped when they become adults. I always knew Allen was thick and when he's talking about things like this, he just proves just how thick.
Allen's reluctance to give any sympathy and minimal credence to victims of abuse by famous people makes me wonder about him, a lot.
This is a rather alarming trait from Steve Allen. There seems to a lot of latent oddness in his character. No doubt it will all come out in the wash.
Heard the beginning of Allen's show this morning. I find his attitude towards people who claim abuse in childhood by famous figures totally disgusting. Of course we know things "have to be proved", you hateful moron. He questioned again how a child could recognise a famous politician, Edward Heath in this case. He appears to think that people's memories are wiped when they become adults. I always knew Allen was thick and when he's talking about things like this, he just proves just how thick.
Allen's reluctance to give any sympathy and minimal credence to victims of abuse by famous people makes me wonder about him, a lot.
When talking about the Ted Heath child abuse allegations Steve dropped into his monologue that he always thought that Heath was gay, as if he was making a connection between paedophilia and homosexuality, really disgraceful.
He really should stick to talking about subjects of which he has knowledge, admittedly it would be difficult for him to spin that out to fill a 2.5 hour show.
When talking about the Ted Heath child abuse allegations Steve dropped into his monologue that he always thought that Heath was gay, as if he was making a connection between paedophilia and homosexuality, really disgraceful.
He really should stick to talking about subjects of which he has knowledge, admittedly it would be difficult for him to spin that out to fill a 2.5 hour show.
I know this is not the point but, why did Steve think he was gay?
He's even too thick to realise what a bad impression he's giving of himself. Mind you, he probably wouldn't care even if he did, hateful creature that he is.
It is indeed very alarming. Allen is not a nice person at all. His fans claim his show is all an "act", I don't buy it, it's him.
I only used to listen to Steve for about an hour a week and I thought it was just an act and thought he was funny. When I started listening to him more I knew it wasn't a act and he has problems and that's what I found funny. I no longer like him or find him funny. He seems obsessed with a z listers and know far too much about them than he should. All the other topics he talks about he seems to have little knowledge of and just makes up the facts to try and make it sound like he knows what he is taking about.
I only used to listen to Steve for about an hour a week and I thought it was just an act and thought he was funny. When I started listening to him more I knew it wasn't a act and he has problems and that's what I found funny. I no longer like him or find him funny. He seems obsessed with a z listers and know far too much about them than he should. All the other topics he talks about he seems to have little knowledge of and just makes up the facts to try and make it sound like he knows what he is taking about.
I don't know why I liked him.
I don't have a problem with him slagging off "celebrities" it is childish and inconsequential but to me it matters not. It is when he decides he wants to put his tuppence-worth in about politics, sex scandals and a mixture of the two. He has nothing to add to such discussions, he makes it up as he goes along, and just does not realise there are times when to stay silent is the best thing to do. As already stated today he caused outrage on this thread a few weeks ago by saying a victim was more or less making it all up. Talk about ill-formed and out of touch. He does tend to think he can say what he likes under the heading of "fair comment" but if what he says is not true it can be construed as libellous, he treads a fine line.
changing the subject completely. I'm really enjoying Duncan Barkes On BBC London 10.00-02.00 (not the whole 4 hours I hasten to add) but he seems far more relaxed and the show flows really well. so sorry Ian Collins although I am a fan I just don't like the Globalisation and the format that you obviously have to follow. when they give you some slack and can return to the creatures of the night format I'm coming back.
BTW whoever read the 7.30pm news bulletin yesterday stumbled on her words 3 times in less than 2 minutes.
I know this is not the point but, why did Steve think he was gay?
TBF, you'd have been hard put to find anybody who didn't think he was gay. But in the 60s/70s the closet door stayed firmly shut if you were a public figure, especially in politics. There was never any proof or confirmation/denial by him, and the assumptions were mainly based on his being unmarried. Perhaps he wasn't bothered one way or the other.
I'd been asking myself that question about you for months, When you & Lone Drinker came on & defended the clown !!!
As I said I changed my mind. I only listened to him for about 6 months for about an hour or 2 a week. When I listened more and more I changed my mind, I still don't understand why people listen to him and complain about what they hear, which is the main reason why he has good listening figures.
As I said I changed my mind. I only listened to him for about 6 months for about an hour or 2 a week. When I listened more and more I changed my mind, I still don't understand why people listen to him and complain about what they hear, which is the main reason why he has good listening figures.
changing the subject completely. I'm really enjoying Duncan Barkes On BBC London 10.00-02.00 (not the whole 4 hours I hasten to add) but he seems far more relaxed and the show flows really well.
Yeah, I'd agree, but it helps that he often has more than one subject going each hour. DB is also allowed to play some music in between the calls which helps break things up a bit and avoid monotony. Having said that when 'Stuart from Stanmore' called in the other evening you felt the the bristles rise on the back of DB's neck and you could hear he was gritting his teeth to remain polite.. It was amusing as well as uncomfortable.
If he has to go to an ad break or news they have to go but, he doesn't cut them off mid sentence. He also can't let people go on for 5 or 10 mins as that would be unfair too.
Gaunt would just cut someone off when they started speaking and would always cut callers off when he was losing the argument.
Which is exactly what O'Brian does. He barely lets some get a sentence out before he starts talking over them, firing off irrelevant questions and belittling them. If they get anywhere near opposing him he'll go off at a tangent and then say they can't follow what he's on about and then cut them off.. He's nastily obsessed with some subjects and can't take opposition.
Dont understand why those tube drivers get paid 50 k a year & get up to 8 weeks holidays for a job thats clearly not worth twice as much as a bus driver.Doesnt sound smart striking when the job is just so lucrative and damn easy - should Harriet have a quiet word ?
Comments
True - they have to wait until they get to Kent - as most seem to be able to do .All asylum seekers are able to claim .
Well, in the other board where people laugh at me for being a Gaunty fan, I'll go so far to say that the way James O'BORING speaks down to you and tries to belittle you, I despise him as much as the people commenting on my board seem to despise Gaunty, so other side of the fence.
Anyway, this has nothing to do with LBC and it's just people trying to score cheap political points.
Interesting. I was listening when Gaunt blew it on Talk Sport and I was one of many who complained to Ofcom. I was happy to see him go. IMO Gobber is heading the same way although I think someone has had a word in his ear recently as he is becoming a little obsequious.
Rubbish. He cut off several callers today
Gaunt would just cut someone off when they started speaking and would always cut callers off when he was losing the argument.
Allen's reluctance to give any sympathy and minimal credence to victims of abuse by famous people makes me wonder about him, a lot.
me too
This is a rather alarming trait from Steve Allen. There seems to a lot of latent oddness in his character. No doubt it will all come out in the wash.
When talking about the Ted Heath child abuse allegations Steve dropped into his monologue that he always thought that Heath was gay, as if he was making a connection between paedophilia and homosexuality, really disgraceful.
He really should stick to talking about subjects of which he has knowledge, admittedly it would be difficult for him to spin that out to fill a 2.5 hour show.
He didn't say which made dropping it into a discussion about possible child abuse even more puzzling.
He's even too thick to realise what a bad impression he's giving of himself. Mind you, he probably wouldn't care even if he did, hateful creature that he is.
It is indeed very alarming. Allen is not a nice person at all. His fans claim his show is all an "act", I don't buy it, it's him.
I don't know why I liked him.
I don't have a problem with him slagging off "celebrities" it is childish and inconsequential but to me it matters not. It is when he decides he wants to put his tuppence-worth in about politics, sex scandals and a mixture of the two. He has nothing to add to such discussions, he makes it up as he goes along, and just does not realise there are times when to stay silent is the best thing to do. As already stated today he caused outrage on this thread a few weeks ago by saying a victim was more or less making it all up. Talk about ill-formed and out of touch. He does tend to think he can say what he likes under the heading of "fair comment" but if what he says is not true it can be construed as libellous, he treads a fine line.
BTW whoever read the 7.30pm news bulletin yesterday stumbled on her words 3 times in less than 2 minutes.
TBF, you'd have been hard put to find anybody who didn't think he was gay. But in the 60s/70s the closet door stayed firmly shut if you were a public figure, especially in politics. There was never any proof or confirmation/denial by him, and the assumptions were mainly based on his being unmarried. Perhaps he wasn't bothered one way or the other.
I'd been asking myself that question about you for months, When you & Lone Drinker came on & defended the clown !!!
Fair play to you mate !
Which is exactly what O'Brian does. He barely lets some get a sentence out before he starts talking over them, firing off irrelevant questions and belittling them. If they get anywhere near opposing him he'll go off at a tangent and then say they can't follow what he's on about and then cut them off.. He's nastily obsessed with some subjects and can't take opposition.