Oh dear, Labour gets it wrong again

1235»

Comments

  • 1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    Try reading the link that Mick supplied. In the survey the more that people became informed, the more they agreed with the DM stance. If you are trying to say that those are more informed who follow the story closely are more susceptible to propaganda then I would like to see some evidence.

    You clearly wouldn't believe the evidence anyway so why would i bother?
  • Drunken ScouserDrunken Scouser Posts: 2,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    Try reading the link that Mick supplied. In the survey the more that people became informed, the more they agreed with the DM stance. If you are trying to say that those are more informed who follow the story closely are more susceptible to propaganda then I would like to see some evidence.

    I take it you missed the poll the other month that showed those who are best-informed about how the welfare state works have much more positive views about it?
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1Mickey wrote: »
    You clearly wouldn't believe the evidence anyway so why would i bother?

    so we just take your word for it then? :rolleyes:
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I take it you missed the poll the other month that showed those who are best-informed about how the welfare state works have much more positive views about it?

    Hows does that relate to this case though? - if the better informed feel that the case raises concerns about the workings of the Welfare System, perhaps they are simply concerned at the damage cases like this can do the system?
  • allaortaallaorta Posts: 19,050
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I take it you missed the poll the other month that showed those who are best-informed about how the welfare state works have much more positive views about it?

    It may well be true to say that many of those who are best informed of how it works, are the recipients.
  • 1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    so we just take your word for it then? :rolleyes:

    I don't know who this "we" is, i think its just you.
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1Mickey wrote: »
    I don't know who this "we" is, i think its just you.

    so its a secret then?
  • 1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    so its a secret then?

    Only for you.
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1Mickey wrote: »
    Only for you.

    Hmm, evidence which is secret - yes that should convince everyone :D:D:D
  • tiggertinytiggertiny Posts: 5,361
    Forum Member
    This useless human being apparently wanted to make sure he kept his kids when bitch no 2 moved out.

    Therefore start a fire and then "save" the kids and try to blame bitch no 2. for starting it, thus ensuring (or so he apparently expected) he would keep the kids and by a happy coincidence £1000 a month in benefits (allegedly)

    Those appear to be the facts of the case as far as I can ascertain.

    One can only guess whether the £1000 a month was a factor in him wanting to keep the children but it seems to me only he knows that and the assertion by some that it was not relevant is merely conjecture.

    One thing is for sure that this scum bag was living off the taxpayer who was funding his revolting lifestyle is undeniable and whether there are only 10 in the country or 10000 more doing the same it is unacceptable.
  • 1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    Hmm, evidence which is secret - yes that should convince everyone :D:D:D

    I don't need to convince "everyone". Those who don't get it are a small minority.
Sign In or Register to comment.