The human trafficking gang lured European women to the UK by promising them jobs as cleaners and nannies

Vishal Chaudhary

Krisztian Abel

Atilla Kovacs

Kunal Chaudhary

Szilvia Abel

First published in News This Is Local London: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter - Waltham Forest

A gang of traffickers have been jailed for conspiring to traffic women into the UK for sexual exploitation.

The four men and one woman trafficked more than hundred women into the UK from Hungary by promising them a more prosperous life but instead many were forced into prostitution and raped.

Following the five month trial at Croydon Crown Court, the group was sentenced to a combined total of 36 years behind bars at the same court on Tuesday.

Ringleader Vishal Chaudhary, 35, of Park View Gardens, Hendon, was jailed for 12 years, Krisztian Abel, 33, of Green Lane, Ilford, for 10 years, Attila Kovacs, 33, of Barnet was given six years, Kunal Chaudhary, 32, of Manchester got five years and Hungarian national Szilvia Abel, 24, was sentenced to three years.

The gang had booked flights for at least 120 women, mostly from Hungary, who were delivered to brothels in Barnet, Camden, Waltham Forest, Haringey, Tower Hamlets, Islington, Enfield and other areas.

Most women had responded to adverts believed to be administrative, cleaning and babysitting jobs but were instead forced or coerced into prostitution, with many being made to have sex with up to 20 men a day.

The women were being controlled by the gang using threats of violence and intimidation, and had their passports taken in order to exert further control over them.

Hungarian national Abel acted as an enforcer and threatened and abused the girls if they did not do as they were told.

In one case, he forced a victim in her 20s to carry out sex acts with clients which left her with serious injuries, as punishment after she discovered the address of the brothel where she was being held.

Chaudhary had lived a plush lifestyle in a penthouse apartment in Canary Wharf and drove a Mercedes convertible up until his arrest on January 30.

Detective Sergeant Alan Clark, of the Trafficking and Kidnap Unit, said: "Many of the victims have been deeply traumatised by what this gang did to them, and displayed signs of severe distress when they told us what had happened to them.

"One victim's graphic account actually brought the interpreter to tears."

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:12am Thu 3 Jul 14

cynicalsue says...

They should have all been jailed for life. Dispicable humans.
They should have all been jailed for life. Dispicable humans. cynicalsue
  • Score: 50

11:22am Thu 3 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

This is enrichment in reality.
This is enrichment in reality. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 1

11:51am Thu 3 Jul 14

DaveInTheForest says...

Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997 DaveInTheForest
  • Score: -4

12:11pm Thu 3 Jul 14

stickmanny says...

Hi Cornbeefur are you asleep? Labour are not in power.
Hi Cornbeefur are you asleep? Labour are not in power. stickmanny
  • Score: -5

12:17pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Thunderbird4 says...

Some people desire a quick sexual thrill and are prepared to give cash for such; it's been this way for centuries.

Some people want lots of money and are prepared to go to any lengths to get it; it's been this way for centuries.

The vast majority of people are treated as a commodity, by a minority of abusers; it's been this way for centuries.

The abuse of any person, is abhorrent to the vast majority - as it rightly should be - which is why there are laws to prevent it.

In this case, the abusers have been stopped; but I fear this type of crime will continue until people realise, abuse of another is not acceptable in what we call, a civilised society.
Some people desire a quick sexual thrill and are prepared to give cash for such; it's been this way for centuries. Some people want lots of money and are prepared to go to any lengths to get it; it's been this way for centuries. The vast majority of people are treated as a commodity, by a minority of abusers; it's been this way for centuries. The abuse of any person, is abhorrent to the vast majority - as it rightly should be - which is why there are laws to prevent it. In this case, the abusers have been stopped; but I fear this type of crime will continue until people realise, abuse of another is not acceptable in what we call, a civilised society. Thunderbird4
  • Score: 9

12:31pm Thu 3 Jul 14

T. Watts says...

@DaveInTheForest

A new Cornbeefur glove puppet?

Oh good! Maybe test drive the darleks, or green toothed lefties?
@DaveInTheForest A new Cornbeefur glove puppet? Oh good! Maybe test drive the darleks, or green toothed lefties? T. Watts
  • Score: -16

1:13pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we?

There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010.

Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era.

Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer!

Hooray! Welcome to the future!

http://www.theguardi
an.com/society/2014/
mar/16/inequality-co
sts-uk-billions
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions Alan_1976
  • Score: 13

3:32pm Thu 3 Jul 14

DaveInTheForest says...

1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers.
2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you
3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer
4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools
1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers. 2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you 3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer 4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools DaveInTheForest
  • Score: -6

3:56pm Thu 3 Jul 14

T. Watts says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers.
2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you
3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer
4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools
1. You are Cornbeefer
2. You missed the bit out about the darleks
3. Utter rubbish about immigration, as always
4. Everything to do with the greedy bankers and their casino economics
5. You still are Cornbeefer
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: 1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers. 2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you 3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer 4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools[/p][/quote]1. You are Cornbeefer 2. You missed the bit out about the darleks 3. Utter rubbish about immigration, as always 4. Everything to do with the greedy bankers and their casino economics 5. You still are Cornbeefer T. Watts
  • Score: -11

4:26pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers.
2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you
3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer
4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools
"1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration"

Wrong.
http://www.theguardi
an.com/politics/2012
/sep/22/living-stand
ards-report-divided-
britain
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/business-23655
605
The depression in wages comes about from a set of government policies that provides benefit for high income households but depresses those for middle and lower. Germany has the same immigration rules as the UK but somehow their wages are rising. Difference? Different government.

"2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you"
You are quite correct there is nothing stopping me. Let's all be bankers! The DaveInTheForest party manifesto is clear. Bankers make lots of money so everyone should be a banker. Genius!

" 3)I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer"
Every cloud etc...

"4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools"
Sweet
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: 1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers. 2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you 3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer 4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools[/p][/quote]"1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration" Wrong. http://www.theguardi an.com/politics/2012 /sep/22/living-stand ards-report-divided- britain http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/business-23655 605 The depression in wages comes about from a set of government policies that provides benefit for high income households but depresses those for middle and lower. Germany has the same immigration rules as the UK but somehow their wages are rising. Difference? Different government. "2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you" You are quite correct there is nothing stopping me. Let's all be bankers! The DaveInTheForest party manifesto is clear. Bankers make lots of money so everyone should be a banker. Genius! " 3)I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer" Every cloud etc... "4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools" Sweet Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

6:15pm Thu 3 Jul 14

stickmanny says...

4) We tell it how it is, which is why you're compelled to respond with your lame pseudonyms
4) We tell it how it is, which is why you're compelled to respond with your lame pseudonyms stickmanny
  • Score: -23

8:32pm Thu 3 Jul 14

DaveInTheForest says...

Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools. DaveInTheForest
  • Score: 7

8:50am Fri 4 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents.

That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools.[/p][/quote]Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents. That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop.... Alan_1976
  • Score: 2

9:36am Fri 4 Jul 14

DaveInTheForest says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents.

That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....
I believe it was you who started going off tangent.

Proof: John Bishop is an avowed socialist who has stated that he would shut private schools. However, he is happy to send his kids to one. Just like Diane Abbot etc. ad nauseum. He also has recently bought a very large and expensive house, paid for, I assume, by his work for the publicly funded BBC.

Tool
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools.[/p][/quote]Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents. That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....[/p][/quote]I believe it was you who started going off tangent. Proof: John Bishop is an avowed socialist who has stated that he would shut private schools. However, he is happy to send his kids to one. Just like Diane Abbot etc. ad nauseum. He also has recently bought a very large and expensive house, paid for, I assume, by his work for the publicly funded BBC. Tool DaveInTheForest
  • Score: -6

9:42am Fri 4 Jul 14

T. Watts says...

DaveInTheForest / Cornbeefur / zzzzzz

I looooove the way people like you always dredge up one or two examples of 'socialists' who send their children to private school or (shock, horror!) own a house.

As if the actions of a couple of individuals in some way negates the whole socialist movement and what its fighting for! Ha! Ha! Ha!

Fool.
DaveInTheForest / Cornbeefur / zzzzzz I looooove the way people like you always dredge up one or two examples of 'socialists' who send their children to private school or (shock, horror!) own a house. As if the actions of a couple of individuals in some way negates the whole socialist movement and what its fighting for! Ha! Ha! Ha! Fool. T. Watts
  • Score: -5

10:54am Fri 4 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents.

That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....
I believe it was you who started going off tangent.

Proof: John Bishop is an avowed socialist who has stated that he would shut private schools. However, he is happy to send his kids to one. Just like Diane Abbot etc. ad nauseum. He also has recently bought a very large and expensive house, paid for, I assume, by his work for the publicly funded BBC.

Tool
Dave,

Still bashing the bishop eh?

I'm struggling to see how John Bishop is responsible for "wage depression from unlimited immigration". I believe he was born and raised in Liverpool. Or do you consider people from outside the forest as "outsiders"...
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools.[/p][/quote]Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents. That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....[/p][/quote]I believe it was you who started going off tangent. Proof: John Bishop is an avowed socialist who has stated that he would shut private schools. However, he is happy to send his kids to one. Just like Diane Abbot etc. ad nauseum. He also has recently bought a very large and expensive house, paid for, I assume, by his work for the publicly funded BBC. Tool[/p][/quote]Dave, Still bashing the bishop eh? I'm struggling to see how John Bishop is responsible for "wage depression from unlimited immigration". I believe he was born and raised in Liverpool. Or do you consider people from outside the forest as "outsiders"... Alan_1976
  • Score: 2

3:57pm Fri 4 Jul 14

myopinioncounts says...

cynicalsue wrote:
They should have all been jailed for life. Dispicable humans.
And their victims should be returned to their countries to warn others against falling for such scams. The UK shouldn't be expected to compensate people who are tricked by allowing them to remain here, anymore than I would be if bought a dodgy car off a " bloke in a pub"
[quote][p][bold]cynicalsue[/bold] wrote: They should have all been jailed for life. Dispicable humans.[/p][/quote]And their victims should be returned to their countries to warn others against falling for such scams. The UK shouldn't be expected to compensate people who are tricked by allowing them to remain here, anymore than I would be if bought a dodgy car off a " bloke in a pub" myopinioncounts
  • Score: -5

6:27pm Fri 4 Jul 14

DaveInTheForest says...

If we had an immigration policy to stop this sort of scum coming into the country, we wouldn't have the cost of dealing with their crimes. See Guardian passim (ad nauseum)
If we had an immigration policy to stop this sort of scum coming into the country, we wouldn't have the cost of dealing with their crimes. See Guardian passim (ad nauseum) DaveInTheForest
  • Score: -1

11:15pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents.

That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....
You mention 'bashing your bishop' too much Al.

I wondered why you disappear for days on end and now we know.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools.[/p][/quote]Dave maybe you could spend some time backing up your arguments with some facts etc instead of going off on random tangents. That way you could stop obsessing about tools and bashing the Bishop....[/p][/quote]You mention 'bashing your bishop' too much Al. I wondered why you disappear for days on end and now we know. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -5

11:20pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay.

You are both still tools.
Spot on!

Frauds in the guise of 'socialists'. Best con artists. Fool the needy. Blair the mast

'Things, can only get better'. But they did not after 13 years.

It did for the Blairs though.
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Maybe instead of being a banker, you may like to be a socialist comedian like John Bishop. That way, you could, like him, bang on about bankers and "posh" people with money, but send your kids to private school and buy a very expensive house. But he makes money form the BBC, so that's okay. You are both still tools.[/p][/quote]Spot on! Frauds in the guise of 'socialists'. Best con artists. Fool the needy. Blair the mast 'Things, can only get better'. But they did not after 13 years. It did for the Blairs though. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -1

11:20pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers.
2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you
3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer
4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools
Agree.
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: 1) People's standard of living has gone down due to wage depression from unlimited immigration. Nothing to do with bankers. 2) You can be a banker if you want to. Nothing stopping you 3) I am nowt to do with Cornbeefer 4) Stickmanny = T.Watts = Alan = tools[/p][/quote]Agree. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -5

11:23pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we?

There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010.

Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era.

Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer!

Hooray! Welcome to the future!

http://www.theguardi

an.com/society/2014/

mar/16/inequality-co

sts-uk-billions
Nobody reads your links. Except you. In between your Bishop Bashing no doubt.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Nobody reads your links. Except you. In between your Bishop Bashing no doubt. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -5

7:00am Sat 5 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we?

There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010.

Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era.

Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer!

Hooray! Welcome to the future!

http://www.theguardi


an.com/society/2014/


mar/16/inequality-co


sts-uk-billions
Nobody reads your links. Except you. In between your Bishop Bashing no doubt.
My that's an original gag Village! Wherever did you get it from?

So busy not reading that you used my joke twice. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

You seem somewhat concerned about when I disappear for days. I hope this isn't the start of another of your bizarre obsessions. I have no desire to be your new Helen.
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Nobody reads your links. Except you. In between your Bishop Bashing no doubt.[/p][/quote]My that's an original gag Village! Wherever did you get it from? So busy not reading that you used my joke twice. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. You seem somewhat concerned about when I disappear for days. I hope this isn't the start of another of your bizarre obsessions. I have no desire to be your new Helen. Alan_1976
  • Score: 6

10:40am Sat 5 Jul 14

G Sladden says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote:
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we?

There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010.

Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era.

Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer!

Hooray! Welcome to the future!

http://www.theguardi

an.com/society/2014/

mar/16/inequality-co

sts-uk-billions
Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian.
http://www.theguardi
an.com/society/2009/
may/08/poverty-equal
ity-britain-incomes-
poor

As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk. G Sladden
  • Score: -5

11:33am Sat 5 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

G Sladden wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions
Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.
Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues.

Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home
[quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues. Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home Alan_1976
  • Score: 3

12:31pm Sat 5 Jul 14

G Sladden says...

Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk.
Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk. G Sladden
  • Score: 15

2:04pm Sat 5 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

G Sladden wrote:
Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk.
Exactly, spot on.
[quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Exactly, spot on. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -4

4:59pm Sat 5 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

G Sladden wrote:
Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk.
Ah yes failure to expose to scrutiny. I don't believe I accused you of xenophobia. The definition of which is of course "Intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries"

So when I present concrete proof that the economic issues are not caused by people from other countries thereby making such a fear "irrational" that is not closing the debate that is presenting you with the reasoning behind my arguments.

Calling someone a liberal leftie in an attempt to discredit their arguments as opposed to actually providing any counterpoint to their evidence is simply arrogant and one would suggest totalitarian. Indeed the apex of close mindedness.

You provided not one iota if evidence to support a contrary point to my argument. Show evidence that immigrants are the source of economic woes?

Or just shout liberal leftie and that you're being repressed
[quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: Xenophobia … ahh… one of the magic words! Homophobia, islamophobia, europhobia… many more words ending in ‘phobia’ and ‘ism’ are available. Casually throw one of these words in the direction of your interlocutors and, as if by magic, the conversation is closed and you have won! The person at the receiving end of a ‘phobia’ or ‘ism’ accusation is silenced. A favourite lefty ‘liberal’ trick. You are absolved of the really hard task of defending your views through debate, and in the process close down discussion. The arrogant and totalitarian premise behind the ‘phobia’ discourse, is the systematic refusal to take seriously the capacities of your opponents in a debate, and, in my opinion, it’s the apex of closed-mindedness. When you refuse to submit your arguments to scrutiny, on the basis that anyone who tries to knock them down is a ‘hater’ or ‘phobic’, problems are rarely examined. Accusing someone of being something-phobic is to make a statement about that person’s mental and moral condition. So the phobic diagnosis is not so much a comment on the content of what has been said, as it is a verdict about the psychological deficits of the guilty, party. And, naturally, irrefutable proof of your moral superiority. As I said before, I despise the left for this kind of hypocrisy and I fear its totalitarian streak. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Ah yes failure to expose to scrutiny. I don't believe I accused you of xenophobia. The definition of which is of course "Intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries" So when I present concrete proof that the economic issues are not caused by people from other countries thereby making such a fear "irrational" that is not closing the debate that is presenting you with the reasoning behind my arguments. Calling someone a liberal leftie in an attempt to discredit their arguments as opposed to actually providing any counterpoint to their evidence is simply arrogant and one would suggest totalitarian. Indeed the apex of close mindedness. You provided not one iota if evidence to support a contrary point to my argument. Show evidence that immigrants are the source of economic woes? Or just shout liberal leftie and that you're being repressed Alan_1976
  • Score: -1

7:43pm Sat 5 Jul 14

weknewit says...

DaveInTheForest wrote:
Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
And invading foreign lands, especially muslim ones. god knows why they love the labour party so much.
[quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]And invading foreign lands, especially muslim ones. god knows why they love the labour party so much. weknewit
  • Score: 14

8:23pm Sat 5 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
G Sladden wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions
Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.
Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues.

Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home
Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream?
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues. Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home[/p][/quote]Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream? Villagecranberry
  • Score: -4

10:36pm Sat 5 Jul 14

Yusufd says...

First Muslim gangs now Hindu ones as well.
First Muslim gangs now Hindu ones as well. Yusufd
  • Score: 5

7:09am Sun 6 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
G Sladden wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions
Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.
Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues.

Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home
Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream?
Lonely Saturday night was it Village?
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues. Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home[/p][/quote]Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream?[/p][/quote]Lonely Saturday night was it Village? Alan_1976
  • Score: 8

12:09pm Sun 6 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
G Sladden wrote:
Alan_1976 wrote:
DaveInTheForest wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997
Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions
Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.
Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues.

Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home
Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream?
Lonely Saturday night was it Village?
Hardly, mobbed out in the Village Pub last night. You should try it.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Sladden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]DaveInTheForest[/bold] wrote: Labour immigration policy - enriching the nation since 1997[/p][/quote]Been in the forest since 1997 have we? There's been a Tory/Lib Dem coalition in charge since 2010. Everything's different now except for Cornbeefur's comments which have remained unchanged since the Mezoic era. Things are much better now. We're all in it together. We solved the problem of the rich bankers having to be bailed out by the public funds by taking away money from the poorest in society because they had so little they wouldn't notice much of a difference. This means the bankers can continue to get their bonuses and the poor people can look forward to a lower life-expectancy. With the ever increasing inequality gap that means the rich are in relative terms even richer! Hooray! Welcome to the future! http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2014/ mar/16/inequality-co sts-uk-billions[/p][/quote]Alan_1976, You may wish to read this article from the Guardian. http://www.theguardi an.com/society/2009/ may/08/poverty-equal ity-britain-incomes- poor As I've said in other posts: the Tories don't care about the poor because they will never vote for them. High levels of unskilled immigration are convenient to most right-wing ‘entrapreneurs’ whatever they may say to the contrary. Labour doesn’t care about the poor either; but the poor, together with lefty ‘liberals’ (it’s in quote because there is nothing remotely liberal about lefty liberals) guardianistas are its vote base. Therefore the left, not only must pretend to care about the poor, but it must make sure that there is an endless supply of them: whatever it takes. High levels of unskilled migrants and paupers from all corner of the world are a necessity for both the right and the left. But, as I said before, I despise the left a little bit more for the pretence of moral superiority. Yuk.[/p][/quote]Personally I despise Xenophobia and the traits it brings out in so many commenters. Periods of financial crisis generally lead to a scapegoating of the "other" as the source of all issues. Right wing/ left wing the source of our economic issues can be found at home[/p][/quote]Al, Bishop bashing night tonight? Extra cream?[/p][/quote]Lonely Saturday night was it Village?[/p][/quote]Hardly, mobbed out in the Village Pub last night. You should try it. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -4

1:00pm Sun 6 Jul 14

Alan_1976 says...

Yes I heard that it was overcrowded as everyone was avoiding the weirdo in the Queens Arms. How was the Queens Arms?
Yes I heard that it was overcrowded as everyone was avoiding the weirdo in the Queens Arms. How was the Queens Arms? Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

6:07pm Sun 6 Jul 14

Villagecranberry says...

Alan_1976 wrote:
Yes I heard that it was overcrowded as everyone was avoiding the weirdo in the Queens Arms. How was the Queens Arms?
Queens Arms rammed as you were in the Nags, drinking everyone's beer, asking for credit as usual.
[quote][p][bold]Alan_1976[/bold] wrote: Yes I heard that it was overcrowded as everyone was avoiding the weirdo in the Queens Arms. How was the Queens Arms?[/p][/quote]Queens Arms rammed as you were in the Nags, drinking everyone's beer, asking for credit as usual. Villagecranberry
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree