manc-mag

Sorry Fop, I'm just teasing really and I know I shouldn't, but it just makes me laugh to see your reaction.

I honestly reckon he could be sectioned on the strength of this thread.

Mad as cheese!

I thought you'd done the 'obsession' fragrance photo previously?

But Fop, villains are twats!

Even if I was obsessed, it doesnt alter the fact people clearly thing you're mongtabulous!

Just a selection of the ringing endorsements for your debating skills there, David Icke. No doubt some sort of sinister conspiracy by the mob of course-what other rational explanation could there be after all?

Absolutely out of his tree!

No shit, Sherlock?! Well I feel educated, so thanks for that, but what the fuck is your vendetta against the plod? Seriously, it doesn't half come across as though you have some major, festering personal greivance Aye "debate"? Hmm.... not seeing it. "Hysterics"? Yup definitely in your reply, not really in my point though. "Making shit up to suit your own adgenda"? Yup, again in your reply. So what were we talking about again? Ah yes, the police acting in an illegal and "Orwellian" way in this country. Pay attention! Do you still think people are disagreeing with you about the example cited? Fop can I ask you a semi-legal question? It's okay you can Googlewack for the answer, as it isn't for one upmanship, it's just so I can illustrate a point.

I think the essential difference is between legitimately having something against them and having everything against them though. I think, with the former that's fine because if it's correctly regulated it allows you to objectively bring them to account in individual circumstances, having a full appreciation of the context-the latter however doesnt serve anyones interests, because (as with all generalisations) it comes across as hysterical and unbalanced and short of pointing out a problem, is singularly unlikely to steer us towards any sensible or practical solutions. cf the difference between Fish and Fop's posts on that, it is absolutely palpable. PS at the risk of labouring the point, absolutely nobody is saying that the behaviour in the title post was correct or justifiable-the fact that Fop continuously keeps misinterpreting this is evidence of the hysterical way in which he approaches the subject. You can tell the guy just isnt capable of rational thought on the matter by these responses. Thats where he is a complete dis-service to the debate.

No fucking thank you!

or 00110011101001001101 Whichever one you want to make up, of course. So am I sposed to be making a story up myself or agreeing with someone elses story now? Not that anything you say makes sense anyway. Either or both... maybe you wouldn't make such a good copper if you need to be walked through your lies... sorry... statements. No, that didn't make any sense either. ho-hum. PS at no point has Fish (or anyone) disputed that the behaviour of the police in the title post was completely incorrect. Where do you get all this cock rot?

I'll bet Wacky has lost count of the number of bobbies helmets he's had slapped around his head.

or 00110011101001001101 Whichever one you want to make up, of course. So am I sposed to be making a story up myself or agreeing with someone elses story now? Not that anything you say makes sense anyway.

Good post by the way (the one with the confusing words). As ever, a lot of sense in the moderate's view. Again I do think you'd make a good copper, trying to back up the "story" even if it has nothing to do with reality. (dunno why just trying to fit in with all the 's) What "story"?

Good post by the way (the one with the confusing words). As ever, a lot of sense in the moderate's view.

Hybrid Mr Logic/Grassy Knollington

You know you'd make quite a good police officer. You know I'm absolutely right, you know there's nothing you can do about it..........so you just try to pick a fight to "get" me some other way. Kudos for being right about something everyone knows to be fact. What story will you break next? PS could have used a bit more bold in that last post. You know, just so we all know that you're right and all (though not at all obsessed with being proved right)

In that case I think use of a taser of possibly rubber bullets would be fully justified. What a bellend. That pretty much sums up all the stars of that piece of video, tbh. Nobody comes out looking good from that - not even the oppressed brummie, on account of his accent. That's the thing, the guy may be an arsehole, but he's an arsehole acting completely legally. If you could be arrested for being an arsehole, then pretty much 100% of politicians and 90%+ of the police force would be currently in prison. It'd be pretty quiet on here too Yup Fish and Manc-Mag would have been executed by now. *chortle*

So in your legal opinion are the police acting within their powers to do the above? I await the deafening silence as you try to look it up on the internet. Jesus wept, here we go! Where did I say they were acting within their powers? You're beyond belief you are, you just read what you want. It's axiomatic that the police shouldn't act like that, just as it's completely self-evident that those things you were saying were not crimes are not actually crimes. I just find it hilarious that you should feel the need to spell it out to us. But getting back to my point (and Fish's), every right minded person knows that corruption and abuse of office within the police force is utterly wrong, but why do you make that (blindingly and objectively obvious) point with such personally motivated bitterness? PS I'm not expecting a straight answer so don't worry. So basically I'm right, you agree I'm right and you're ignoring everything to try and pick a fight. I don't I just like posting them on here as it winds you lot up no end. I do think the state of the UKs police force is shocking though, and there's few more serious things to be concerned about in life than liberty. Out of interest out of all your ecounters with the police how many people can actually name a positive one at all (where they caught someone that mugged you/broke into your house etc.)? And what would be your ratio of police encouters +ve/neutral/-ve? Basically it's nice to see that you do agree with me that the police were acting in a totally incorrect manner, even if you think it's fine for them to carry on doing so (so long as they don't do it to YOU personally I guess). Yeah you're absolutely right and in other news the world is not flat. I think you think you have something interesting or important to say but unfortunately there you are wrong. Love the indignation by the way when you were ignorant enough to totally misread my viewpoint to start with- and then say that i'm trying to pick a fight. There's no fight to be had because you're stating the bleeding obvious.

So in your legal opinion are the police acting within their powers to do the above? I await the deafening silence as you try to look it up on the internet. Jesus wept, here we go! Where did I say they were acting within their powers? You're beyond belief you are, you just read what you want. It's axiomatic that the police shouldn't act like that, just as it's completely self-evident that those things you were saying were not crimes are not actually crimes. I just find it hilarious that you should feel the need to spell it out to us. But getting back to my point (and Fish's), every right minded person knows that corruption and abuse of office within the police force is utterly wrong, but why do you make that (blindingly and objectively obvious) point with such personally motivated bitterness? PS I'm not expecting a straight answer so don't worry.

I know this is the daily mail, but even so it's appalling (and surely illegal) that the police would try to do this and effectively threaten people and invent a "crime" (it is NOT a crime to talk to the press, send an e-mail to the press or indeed a victim of a crime to sell their story) to try and suppress something. We really need much strong oversight on the police force in this country. Especially as this is for a fairly piffling thing, iimagine what they do for things that they REALLY don't want in the Press. No shit, Sherlock?! Well I feel educated, so thanks for that, but what the fuck is your vendetta against the plod? Seriously, it doesn't half come across as though you have some major, festering personal greivance

An absolute joy tonight.

What fucking neck?