Shocked, Shocked I tell you

[sasguru]

as that was the completely unsupported assertion based on fewer being in prison, which I challenged with facts. I'm sure you believe that as its obviously bollox.

Do feel free to try to make a reasoned argument. It might be amusing.

Darmy did try but failed.

Let the congregation decide, eh?
I would be embarrased if I were you. But I suppose since you're as dense as a block of wood, you don't even know why.

All these graduates coming over, committing crime

Thanks for the laugh.

[vetran]

Let the congregation decide, eh?
I would be embarrased if I were you. But I suppose since you're as dense as a block of wood, you don't even know why.

All these graduates coming over, committing crime

Thanks for the laugh.

I hope no one pays you for bashing together two disjointed sets and reaching the wrong conclusion, if that is the level of your expertise its scary if you do anything more advanced than sort marbles.

[darmstadt]

I did with colours, sorry you are having problems.

Point out exactly where it says that the crime did not involve someone living abroad.

The headline, one would expect there to some clear facts in the article but there ain't, continue on your wild and woolly way

Ministers launch blitz on Brits who claim benefits while living abroad after 10,000 were sanctioned last year

[NotAllThere]

I did with colours, sorry you are having problems.

Point out exactly where it says that the crime did not involve someone living abroad.

This is typical vetran behaviour. When cornered, refer to the original article but refuse to quote any of it that supports his argument.

I'd say he's got the analytic ability of my cat (who is as thick as mince), but it would be unfair. He hasn't got the analytic ability of my cat.

[vetran]

This is typical vetran behaviour. When cornered, refer to the original article but refuse to quote any of it that supports his argument.

I'd say he's got the analytic ability of my cat (who is as thick as mince), but it would be unfair. He hasn't got the analytic ability of my cat.

I'm not refusing to quote, I am not quite sure how I can get down to You & Darmys level having highlighted the bits in pink & size 10 font in my earlier post, I quoted the two examples in the story and explained where the investigating abroad occurred.

I suppose you & Darmy are confused about a journalist using the largest number for sensationalism?
Its obvious that they didn't prosecute 10,000 people living abroad, I read it as the number prosecuted overall had gone up because they had now started looking whether people who were claiming benefits were living or frequently travelling abroad.

I am assuming they were checking passenger manifests and foreign transactions on people who wouldn't be able (physically or monetarily) to travel abroad. Very sensible in my opinion.

So what precisely don't you understand? Do please explain carefully because you are making no sense presently.

[NotAllThere]

Ah, you're so cute when you're trying to be rational.

For the record, I don't think you're Keithy.

[vetran]

The headline, one would expect there to some clear facts in the article but there ain't, continue on your wild and woolly way

and in the first few lines expands on the headline, I will highlight in red as usuaul!

Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey has warned benefit cheats overseas that international anti-fraud teams were coming for them
About 5,000 fraudsters were convicted last year and others given penalties
The blitz by DWP recovered a record £1.1billion at home and abroad

Here is the Sun with the names & more detail, not seen it in the Granuaid yet!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/704802...ts-caught-out/

and from the government

https://assets.publishing.service.go...tax-system.pdf

[NotAllThere]

and in the first few lines expands on the headline, I will highlight in red as usuaul!



Here is the Sun with the names & more detail, not seen it in the Granuaid yet!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/704802...ts-caught-out/

and from the government

https://assets.publishing.service.go...tax-system.pdf

Yeah - you keep fighting.

[Whorty]

I'm not refusing to quote, I am not quite sure how I can get down to You & Darmys level having highlighted the bits in pink & size 10 font in my earlier post, I quoted the two examples in the story and explained where the investigating abroad occurred.

I suppose you & Darmy are confused about a journalist using the largest number for sensationalism?
Its obvious that they didn't prosecute 10,000 people living abroad, I read it as the number prosecuted overall had gone up because they had now started looking whether people who were claiming benefits were living or frequently travelling abroad.

I am assuming they were checking passenger manifests and foreign transactions on people who wouldn't be able (physically or monetarily) to travel abroad. Very sensible in my opinion.

So what precisely don't you understand? Do please explain carefully because you are making no sense presently.

I so love reading your ever more desperate posts, struggling to prove your point when the evidence is so overwhelmingly against you. It's quite entertaining watching you clutching at more and more straws. Buggered if I can work out what you'll do though once single use, plastic straws are banned .... you'll have nothing left to clutch

[darmstadt]

and in the first few lines expands on the headline, I will highlight in red as usuaul!



Here is the Sun with the names & more detail, not seen it in the Granuaid yet!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/704802...ts-caught-out/

and from the government

https://assets.publishing.service.go...tax-system.pdf

Still haven't answered have you, where are the facts n the article pertaining to the headline?