Modern Life Is Rubbish

[trastrick]

37 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

     Snip

 

     A person in shock does not need your political views. A person recovering recovering from shock/trauma does not need you political views or to be used in some ex-pat Britain is crap rant.

      Using the misfortune of an individual who through no fault of their own was involved in a traumatic incident is unfortunate.

What the purpose of invoking Spitfire pilots is bizarre?

What is the purpose of claiming without any evidence that he is on benefit?

Here you go again. 

 

First, I did not send him my personal political views. I gave my general opinion on the issue, reported here, is all.

 

Second, I did not "claim", "he is on benefits".

 

I actually wished the poor traumatized individual well!

 

To whit:

 

"Hopefully the poor snowflake, can find a little peace, on benefits, and and some fishing trips".

 

 

Next? 

 

Edited March 6, 2023 by trastrick

[Annie Bynnol]

3 minutes ago, trastrick said:

Here you go again. 

First, I did not send him my personal political views. I gave my opinion on the issue, is all.

Second, I did not "claim", "he is on benefits".

I actually wished the poor traumatized individual well!To whit:

"Hopefully the poor snowflake, can find a little peace, on benefits, and and some fishing trips".

Next? 

     You are using a real person you know nothing about except that he was a train driver involved in one fatal and a possible second incident(your "Joke of the month") through absolutely no fault of his own to further your beliefs about Britain, snowflakes,  public officials(which he is not) and benefits(which he you have no idea if he was in receipt of).

      

[trastrick]

27 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

     You are using a real person you know nothing about except that he was a train driver involved in one fatal and a possible second incident(your "Joke of the month") through absolutely no fault of his own to further your beliefs about Britain, snowflakes,  public officials(which he is not) and benefits(which he you have no idea if he was in receipt of).

  

I would hope he has benefits, while off work!

 

It's a huge program, and I've seen, less deserving folks, who know how to play the game get them.

 

But I don't want my taxi driver, bus driver, train driver, or pilot to be in charge of my transportation, if he has recently been "traumatized", but is back at work?

 

 

[RollingJ]

8 minutes ago, trastrick said:

I would hope he has benefits, while off work!

 

It's a huge program, and I've seen, less deserving folks, who know how to play the game get them.

 

But I don't want my taxi driver, bus driver, train driver, or pilot to be in charge of my transportation, if he has recently been "traumatized", but is back at work?

 

 

He probably didn't expect to meet a similar situation so soon after returning?

[trastrick]

error

Edited March 6, 2023 by trastrick

[Annie Bynnol]

26 minutes ago, trastrick said:

I would hope he has benefits, while off work!

It's a huge program, and I've seen, less deserving folks, who know how to play the game get them.

But I don't want my taxi driver, bus driver, train driver, or pilot to be in charge of my transportation, if he has recently been "traumatized", but is back at work?

    Guessing again.

    Who said he was "...off work!" and receiving benefits?    

    All we know is that he returned to driving after a previous incident.

    Associating a real person with somebody of being an undeserving  snowflake spending his time fishing while on benefits as a result of being  involved in a fatality is wrong.

     I have no idea how your country deals with train drivers who have been subject to similar incidents, but I am sure that here there will be a well established and thorough assessment before the individual wants to/allowed to return as a driver.

 

[trastrick]

41 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

    Guessing again.

    Who said he was "...off work!" and receiving benefits?    

    All we know is that he returned to driving after a previous incident.

    Associating a real person with somebody of being an undeserving  snowflake spending his time fishing while on benefits as a result of being  involved in a fatality is wrong.

     I have no idea how your country deals with train drivers who have been subject to similar incidents, but I am sure that here there will be a well established and thorough assessment before the individual wants to/allowed to return as a driver.

 

You mean he carried on as a train driver, after having being involved in the second incident where an "assumed"  suicide stepped in front of his train?

 

Wasn't he traumatized by the second incident?

 

It's getting silly, or the initial reports were wrong?

[Annie Bynnol]

5 minutes ago, trastrick said:

You mean he carried on as a train driver, after having being involved in the second incident where an "assumed"  suicide stepped in front of his train?

 

Wasn't he traumatized by the second incident?

 

It's getting silly, or the initial reports were wrong?

       The eyewitness account(me) has not changed. What the guard said to us on the platform and on the train has not changed.

       Your repeated attempts to smear British train drivers has failed.

[trastrick]

9 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

       The eyewitness account(me) has not changed. What the guard said to us on the platform and on the train has not changed.

       Your repeated attempts to smear British train drivers has failed.

Why the sudden disinterest in mansplaining all the juicy details?

 

I'll just have to take your word for it!

 

(NOT!) 

 

[RJRB]

That seems to turn the usual definition of mansplaining on its head.

Lol