CB Fry

Would a be bizarre business to have on a Premier League football shirt, as there's not really any meaningful use from the consumer awareness that they'd have to sink XX million quid to unlock. Unless they are about to do something radically new, or it's part of a Barcelona style charity tie-up connected to a field of research they are currently in. K Billy might just be winding us all up.

To be honest, I don't think it should be fair. The government are right to try and give people information to explain why they think their position is right. The government who called this referendum didn't plan it as a 50/50 choice. It's an attempt to get the people ratify their policy. This isn't a general election. It may well backfire, we'll see. But I don't accept that the leaflet content was wrong or biased, as we have seen on this thread it has been interpreted as "lies" by people who have decided to fill in the gaps of what they think it "really" says and then get upset about it, despite the words in the leaflet being perfectly accurate and true. I'm not here to defend Cameron, I'm no Conservative voter, but I think the leaflet was not unreasonable.

Let's see. Box of frogs is an acceptable name for a theatre group, a comedy troupe, a band featuring members of the Yardbirds, a Web development agency, a pub in Ireland and is used a a term of endearment in reviews and interviews. No one seems to see it as shorthand for disability. I use it for Art on this forum because he is, clearly, nuts. Never said it about you, ever. http://boxoffrogstheatreacademy.co.uk/our-team/ https://boxoffrogsimpro.wordpress.com/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_of_Frogs http://livingthesheepsheadway.com/box-of-frogs/ Swivel eyed is different, it only has one context, mainly fanaticism specifically for right wing reactionaries. Occasionally brandished as a badge of honour, but some do get offended by it, but on the terms of denying their strident political beliefs rather than any implication of mental difficency. It exists entirely in the political sphere. Left wing equivalent is probably bleeding-heart, lily-livered or yoghurt knitter or something about sandal - wearing. I use it solely for Saint Richmond who will only return in the summer to rant in capital letters about the transfer window. Never said it about you, ever. http://www.newstatesman.com/voices/2013/05/defence-swivel-eyed-lunacy http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22607108 On the other hand, your attempted put down to me - I'm drooling out the side of my mouth, oh aha-ha-ha-ha - is entirely loaded with implications of disability, especially cerebral palsy or Down's syndrome. I'm robust enough to not be offended by your pathetic line of attack but personally think you should be suitably embarrassed by such schoolyard barbs, especially when linked with your gleeful baiting of someone else here as being autistic because they disagree with you. You're too pig headed and ignorant to apologise but I don't think using disability to mock is acceptable. For a long time, I've paid monthly to Scope, inspired by the comedian Richard Herring (he's mad as a box of frogs he is). Perhaps that's something you could consider too. http://www.scope.org.uk/ Apologies to everyone, this isn't on topic but I am not standing by to be fu cking lectured at by some pompous arse who thinks it's acceptable to use disability to attack someone on a bloody football forum.

Besmirching the great British public as effing stupid is the last refuge of the scoundrel but I think we can both do it: over the last week or so I have become convinced Out will win, driven by the same utter stupidity of the British people who I think will hoover up the belief that their vote will send-em-back or keep-em-out or both and we can clean up Blighty of Johnny Polish and Johnny Refugee for once and for all. *****ing stupid indeed, and highly depressing for some of us. Your comments on the leaflet and the referendum are bizarre. The referendum was about letting the people decide but accepting the government have a clear, unequivocal recommendation. It was never "we don't know what to do, so we'll have a vote" it was looking for voter support for the recommended course. And the Government is the government, not the Conservative party or even the Conservative MPs as a whole. The leaflet is fine and read well and isn't misleading, if anything a breath of fresh air from the utter guff coming out from Boris's backside. But I think the out campaign will shout louder and have a simpler message and I think will win, especially as they will have turn out on their side. So don't worry. You'll get what you want.

Except you do say it here. That's the thing about forums. What you write actually stays there for people to see. It's the bit where you say "they should do the same" - I took that to mean "they should do the same" because you wrote "they should do the same". No actual mention of neither here at all. You've only said neither in other posts is when you've said "both or neither" and my point is that is a false choice as both would have been wrong. So not both, an option you desperately continue to cling to. Anyway, clearly I am wasting my time here. I tried.

I don't understand how the Metro have spun that as him insulting the fans. Just typical vague footballer platitudes. Obviously the insult is basically how terrible they've been all season, but that's a different thing.

Now what are you on about? I haven't said you said that C4 shared false information, I'm saying that's what you keep asking them to do. Read my post again. The info C4 shared was correct, the info you seem to want them to have shown would have been wrong and not justified by the data. You don't understand the simple point I am making, which is odd, but I'll stop making it because it is pretty bleeding dull now.

It's not an argument, it's just contradiction. It isn't a lie, it's true. If you want to read more into it then fine but avoid saying "I read this in the leaflet and it's an absolute lie" when it, well, ain't.

Here's your quote from the leaflet. It's not a lie, or an "absolute lie" to use your phrase. It's true. It's what we call the truth.

That worked then. We'll win this.

Everton are pretty good at late capitulation, so we will definitely score in a minute. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

If by being "pedantic" you mean calling you out when you clearly lie, then yes.

Being that he's now proved everyone wrong and is clearly now a top half Premier League quality mega-player after all, how come Gaston has been starting on the bench for the last couple of Boro matches? One can only assume that the rest of the squad have been swallowed up with jealousy at being in the presence of such brilliance and have complained to the manager.

I've never said "crazy as a box of frogs" but the expression I have used is clearly not as perojative or clearly related to mental illness/disability as references to "dribbling from the side of your mouth". Ditto "swivel eyed" which has a long history in political commentary over the years. I don't think I have seen either of those expressions linked to mental illness or disability or Down's syndrome or Cerebal Palsy that your expression could easily be linked to. Funnily enough I use those two expressions directly about two different and specific contributors to this forum, neither of them you. I think you feel you're missing out as I haven't got a catchphrase for you. Anyway, make your mind up - if you are feigning offence at "Box of Frogs" then why are you using references to "dribbling from the side of your mouth" as a perojative term which is far, far worse on any measure you like. Let's be clear, I'm not in any way offended - you will never offend me - but I am enjoying your usual, addled, rag-bag of contradictory nonsence that makes up your thought process. Anyway, I am sure you are only three or four posts away from you pompously asking "are you saying this about ALL 1 billion Muslims???" to someone on this thread for the 57th time. Here's a hint: they aren't.

I think your "dribbling from the side of your mouth" comment is unhelpful and offensive with a clear implication. For someone who likes to ponce about on every thread as a holier-than-though moral authority it's interesting to get some clear evidence to show how paricularly malevolent you can be. We've seen it now a few times in the last couple of days and it's good to see how you really are.

You going to start accusing me of being autistic or disabled too now? Classy.

It's you getting wound up, I'm just pointing and laughing.

Indeed it is. Not really helped by people saying that factually correct statements are "absolute lies", is it? That's the dictionary definition of spurious, yes? If that's anal to you, then it's going to be a long ten weeks.

Try and stick to the facts in future. I accept your apology.

My advice would be to not make stuff up in your head and then claim it is an absolute lie. "Absolute" is a rather difinitive statement and the "oh it was from memory" vagueness only came afterwards. And has been mentioned the statement isn't an absolute lie anyway. But carry on, it's good to get the measure of someone.

The side of truth.

What's agressive about pointing out absolute lies?

You only said it was from memory when I challenged your "absolute lie" claim. Although in fairness your original post was correct. What you said was in the leaflet was indeed an absolute lie.

And my point, which it looks like you still don't understand, is that the 1% is not statistically significant to justify turning that into a population equivalent. It would be an unjustified, sensationalist number. On the 4% it wasn't incorrect to show the population, just ill-advised editorially. For you to again suggest Channel 4 knowingly share false and unjustified information suggest you don't really understand what "a reasonable and rational analysis of the figures" actually means. Funny I thought you understood my point when I explained before but looks like I over estimated you. Try again. PS. Also interesting you switched the percentages around in this post. Nice try.

And thats not an "absolute lie" is it? I came through an airport the other day and I was checked and I weren't even a greasy dago, frog or kraut or a brown person or nothing.