Happ Hazzard

I watched his final fight with Joe Bugner a few weeks ago. I thought the decision was correct.

People on Twitter are saying that Cooper dying leaves only Margaret Thatcher still living from the famous Norwegian football rant commentary when they beat us in 1981. I've just looked up the full thing and it's not that impressive, because only 3 of the people mentioned were still alive at the time, Princess Diana, Cooper and Thatcher.

Cooper is also notable as being the man who made it acceptable for straight men to wear deoderant in this country.

Henry Cooper is worthy of getting a seperate RIP thread, surely?

Radio 1 promo from 1992, featuring a very young Chris Evans, an early Pete Tong (who must have been cringing inside) and Jakki Brambles, who is one of the few women to be hotter at 40 than she was at 25.

Not having a go, but why is it that everyone on this forum who disagrees with you is considered automatically a liberal? I noticed a lot on this forum who disagreed with you have said that they are not liberals or left wing and are somewhere in the middle, yes me and others on here are more left wing than right wing but for the sake of those who arent stop generalising everyone who doesnt agree with you please.

I don't consider everyone that disagrees with me a liberal. I specified Carbomb in this instance. If this is not the case I apologise for making that presumption.

How about you stop claiming that people are berating you for a difference of opinion, rather than the real reason, which is they're fed up with your non-method of argument, which consists of asking questions, then whining about the swearing as a smokescreen for the fact you've provided no counters, and moving the goalposts or hiding behind "the leftist agenda" as a standard fall-back when they address them, completely ignoring any points they make, then coming back and claiming none have been made, despite several people providing you with several, blatant, cited examples from previous pages?

Fuck off. You do not decide what is and what isn't a valid method of argument. Post your opinions. Other people do the same. Don't start telling peopel how and when and what they are allowed to post for it to be considered "valid" in your own cosy liberal world.

I'm not talking about using legal means, though. People have been raising kids for millennia simply by providing them with the proper guidance in the right direction, which is my point. I'm not arguing that kids have a legal right to choose whatever they want to eat, but parents who cite that as a reason for actively supplying them with shit they know is bad for them are a bunch of wretched fucking cunts who don't deserve to even BE fertile, let alone have kids. I'm not a parent, but even I know that parents are supposed to have a sense of responsibility for their child, and that includes doing your best to get them to eat properly. Until a certain age, most parents get to decide anyway by being the sole providers, but later on, when the kids have access to other foods, said parents should be making every effort to educate and encourage these children to eat healthily, and any parent who does what that fuck-headed mother did by providing hot-dog/burger vans and so on is betraying that responsibility.

 

I wouldn't put it on a par with child abuse, and you can't really legislate for such things outside making sure schools provide nutritious meals, but it's bad parenting nonetheless. I suppose I'm simply advocating screaming abuse in said parents face, Aphex Twin-style, until they fucking listen.

I agree with that. But why have we got to the stage where so many parents genuinely think there is nothing wrong with feeding their kids junk(or letting them feed themselves junk) despite the fact that it is obvious to everyone that they are becoming dangerously unhealthy as a result. IMO it is because of the increasing scope of the state, and the idea that people should leave things to "society" to take care of, whether that be education, basic socialisation (such as teaching kids to eat with a knife and fork, wipe their own arse, and even be able to sit up unaided), money (EMA as a benefits starter kit), and plenty of other things I could think of given time. The more the state does for people, the less they are prepared to do themselves, and society suffers as a result, particularly when cuts have to be made, as is the case at present.

I do enjoy the way you feel any abuse is caused by people being leftist bullying fuckwits, and it hasn't occurred to you that it may be more a reflection of the way you behave on here.

But c'est la vie.

The only way I am behaving on here is putting my points across in a reasonable way. If people can't handle that, it's their problem.

 

The problem is that too many people can't handle their narrow-minded viewpoints being challenged in any way, and throw their toys out of the pram when anyone dares to post something that goes against the liberal line. It seems to be fairly consistent across just about any kind of political forum on the internet, other than those that are strictly moderated.

 

You just couldn't have illustrated my point any better.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. As I am to mine. It is not for the likes of you to state that the way I put my points across is "wrong", becuase they do not fit your tightly bound rules of discussion.

Why not try arguing against the points, rather than arguing against how they are worded?

I do enjoy the way you feel any abuse is caused by people being leftist bullying fuckwits, and it hasn't occurred to you that it may be more a reflection of the way you behave on here.

But c'est la vie.

The only way I am behaving on here is putting my points across in a reasonable way. If people can't handle that, it's their problem.

The problem is that too many people can't handle their narrow-minded viewpoints being challenged in any way, and throw their toys out of the pram when anyone dares to post something that goes against the liberal line. It seems to be fairly consistent across just about any kind of political forum on the internet, other than those that are strictly moderated.

Just do medicals at school, kids found to be overweight get a letter sent home, seriously overweight get a different letter, no change 6 months later and bring charges of neglect against the parents.

Before we venture down such dimly lit paths, why not suggest that the Government focus first of all on the actual fast food companies themselves? Most of their marketing is aimed at children, isn't it?

 

The truth is, if people started eating healthier these big companies wouldn't be too happy about it.

 

Another factor would have to be price. I tend to eat quite healthy, and I know that it isn't cheap. Fresh fruit & vegetables don't come cheap, and they don't have a long shelf life either. I usually find myself in the supermarket at least twice a week. Does a parent who works all day and looks after a child at night have time to do that?

 

Throw in chicken breast, fruit juices (real fruit juices, not the sugar-laden shit), fresh fish and the like and it can easily mount up. I can spend anything up to

I'm not opposed to prisoners being allowed perks. But they should have to earn them, by working. They shouldn't be given as a matter of course.

Can you show me instances of criminals being sent to prison and being given playstations, big televisions & nice comfy cells straight off the bat?

 

I know for a fact that anyone who get's sent down to Barlinnie prison in Glasgow gets put in a small cell with another person, and they stay in that cell for between 20-22 hours per day most of the time, with an hour excercise allowed.

 

They get three one hour visits per month.

 

There's no Playstations, no Sky television in their cell etc.

 

Once they put in a period of time with good behaviour they get moved to a slightly bigger cell, get the opportunity to work a job (for around

A few posts later, when someone pulled you up on it you stated they should first be warned. Your original post was a little more reactionary.

Care to answer my question about where your experience/knowledge of prison comes from?

Dealing with people recently released from prison while working for Jobcentre plus. The most striking comment I heard is that someone would rather beat someone up than grass them up to the police because they didn't want them to go to prison because it was so good. It's abundantly clear that for a lot of people, it's being released that is the punishment, and being in prison the easy life.

Where did I say "instantly" put into care homes? I explicitly stated that warnings should be given and time given to remedy the situation.

I'm not opposed to prisoners being allowed perks. But they should have to earn them, by working. They shouldn't be given as a matter of course.

Can you show me instances of criminals being sent to prison and being given playstations, big televisions & nice comfy cells straight off the bat?

 

I know for a fact that anyone who get's sent down to Barlinnie prison in Glasgow gets put in a small cell with another person, and they stay in that cell for between 20-22 hours per day most of the time, with an hour excercise allowed.

 

They get three one hour visits per month.

 

There's no Playstations, no Sky television in their cell etc.

 

Once they put in a period of time with good behaviour they get moved to a slightly bigger cell, get the opportunity to work a job (for around

Kayfabe Memories? That's a forum dedicated to pre-1990s wrestling. There's no political discussion. I've posted there maybe 10 times in the last 5 years.

And if you think my opinions are "ridiculous" and "exaggerated" you are mistaken. It just goes to show how skewed some people's viewpoints are that perfectly reasonable views such as making prisons somewhat harsher, and that paying the absolute dregs of society to have children might not exactly be the best idea, are viewed as being beyond the pale.

Or do you think this forum is representitive of public opinion? Actually, that would be the political threads, since the resident leftist fuckwits manage to run off and intimidate anyone that goes against their views from posting, as confirmed by the several PMs that I have recieved in the past few months.

I'm very much pro stopping parasitic wasters having kids.

 

You've had the snip, then?

 

It's pretty clear that Happ Hazard is trying to make a name for himself across various boards online and is prepared to look an utter mong in doing so. He's pulling off this act on other forums as well with his opinions getting more and more extreme when he realises he's losing his audience. I'm just not buying it any more, but he had me going for a while.

What "other forums" am I "pulling off this act" on?

This and the F4W board are about the only two I post on.

But who's going to investigate the parents who are getting it wrong?

 

Also, stop moving the goalposts every time someone points out idiotic flaws in your arguments.

Investigate them? Just do medicals at school, kids found to be overweight get a letter sent home, seriously overweight get a different letter, no change 6 months later and bring charges of neglect against the parents.

Like I say, it isn't a matter of education. If parents are genuinely not aware that fruit and vegetables and properly cooked meals are healthier than microwave ready meals and turkey twizzler, then they aren't fit to be parents in the first place. The problem is laziness and people thinking it is someone else's problem. Pretty much symptomatic of how people become when we allow the public sector to fill roles that families used to fulfill themselves.

So you're going to reduce the bloated public sector by having an army of Gilliam McKeiths studying the dietary habits of every family in the country, fining and/or locking up the bad parents and taking the kids into care?

 

To hell with your priorities on the wellbeing of children. It's your economics that blows my mind.

No. Studying the dietary habits is the responsibility of the parents. It's not hard to eat a well balanced diet. It's an issue of laziness and irresponsible behaviour, not lack of knowledge.

I'm not opposed to prisoners being allowed perks. But they should have to earn them, by working. They shouldn't be given as a matter of course.

Well yeah, nutrition's important. No-one's denying that.

However, it's not as important as not sexually abusing your child, and one hopes you realise that.

It's also not important enough to send someone to prison for getting it wrong.

See your point that we'd be better off doing that, than having support workers to help poor parents, just seems ridiculous, it would cost more, would rip apart families, it's stuff like that which makes people assume you're trolling. Or mentally imbalanced.

Sexual abuse is a different kettle of fish, but seriously, it's at least as important as people hitting their kids. It should be treated seriously, and not as something to be joked about. Parents should be given warnings, and if they fail to head them, criminal charges should be brought.

I don't think having the highest rate of childhood obesity in Europe is a good thing.

I don't think parents allowing their children to get so fat that their life will be shortened is a good thing. It's child abuse. Kids don't know any better, it's up to parents to teach them healthy eating habits. If they aren't doing this then they are failing as parents.

Feeding kids junk is child abuse, jail the parents and take the kids into care.

We hardly have enough room to house the actual criminals in our prisons without throwing parents in jail for buying their kids a big Mac meal.

We've got plenty of room, just keep cramming them in.

Children should not be eating adult McDonalds meals. An occasional Happy Meal is fine. Parents who feed their kids unhealthy rubbish on a daily basis are guilty of child abuse, I don't see how that can be argued with. They are damaging their children just as much as they would be by violently abusing or sexually abusing them, and it should be treated in the same way.

Well you wouldn't. But poor nutrition and criminality have been shown to be linked in scientific studies.

So how about putting the onus on parents to feed their children properly, instead of paying people to do everything for them besides wipe the kids arses? Feeding kids junk is child abuse, jail the parents and take the kids into care. There's no excuse for it. It's just governments not wanting to upset people who are lazy and/or stupid.

Cliched, empty-headed nonsense. The perks are there to encourage good behaviour and to pacify the prisoners because it is ultimately the most cost effective and safest way to run a prison.

It makes prisons pointless though. What is the point of a prison that represents a significant improvement of lifestyle for many of the inmates? What on earth is supposed to dissuade them from committing more crimes when they are released, when they know there's nothing they have to fear but 4 free meals a day, free TV, free playstations, pool, table tennis, medical care, etc, etc.

It might be cost effective in the short term but it is certainly not cost effective in the long run, as it just builds a massive criminal population that has no interest in going straight because it is far easier to break the law and spend most of their life in prison.

As I said before, even the southern states in the USA are beginning to move away from this kind of stupid rhetoric, because in practice it is very, very expensive to implement.

The only reason it is expensive is because of human rights legislation. How can it be more expensive to have bare bones prisons with no luxuries?

If your idea is so good, why doesn't the Tory-led coalition implement these policies? I'll tell you why, it's 'cos it's bollocks!

Politicians aren't affected by crime. Put in a government of people who actually have experience of living in crime ridden areas and you'd find a different attitude entirely.

Probably yes. But if you cut all the social work and all that 'lefty shite', the chickens come home to roost soon enough and you get higher crime rates; which would lead to more people being put in prison except the Conservatives now believe (not completely without justification) that prison is a waste of money. People will care about that stuff soon enough. The fact of the matter is though that even the southern states in the USA are starting to realise that throwing increasing amounts of people into prison for increasingly long stretches isn't really very economic.

 

And as for LGBT coordinators - people who identify with being 'LGBT' pay taxes as well. In most cases they don't have children, so they are not particularly burdensome on the state and a couple of outreach coordinators is not going to change that.

Who said anything about cutting social work?

I don't accept that 5 a day co-ordinators etc are responsible for reducing crime.

If prisons are a waste of money it is because of the amount that is spent on luxuries for the prisoners. Make them into proper prisons again and you will not only save money but they might actually be a deterrent to anyone that spends time inside and to some that have not and do not want to.

The council might be reduced to simply emptying the bins and keeping the streets clean, and as we know, stuff like that isn't what people care about at all.

It will be something they care about once the amount of uplifts per month are reduced.

Huh?

I'd imagine the law will be changed very soon. Otherwise where will the money come from for council execs

We get it you mong you hate the Guardian and anyone to the left of Vince McMahon.

Not at all. I've got a lot of time for the genuine left. I hate what the Labour party (and the Guardian) have become. They have completely betrayed the very people they were set up to represent. Here we have former senior advisor Lord Glasman admitting that the party was openly hostile to working class people, who it saw as "resistant to change".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13...ation-lies.html

Visit http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/imm...rd-Glasman.html

I think Labour are finished in their current form. They will have to have a complete purge and completely remove anyone even remotely connected with New Labour if they want to be electable again.

What's the forums general opinion on David Cameron's announcements of reducing immigration? IMO he's absolutely right, but I'm far from convinced that the Tories will actually be the ones to do something about it. The party makes far too much from the CBI etc to be able to make any tangible difference. Watching all the Guardianistas tie themselves in knots over the last few days has been fun though. It's become clearer than ever that they have given up the ghost as a British newspaper and are now concentrating on establishing themselves as the website for limousine/latte/cocaine liberals the world over, their original intentions as an organ to represent the urban British working class completely abandoned.