Harry,
The article focused on the plight of the poor, not on an individual doss house. So why would it be named? By your pitiful reasoning skills, there were no doss houses, and the poor didn't sleep on benches either.
Why? Here:
Read this account of a homeless shelter, written up in the pall mall. Is there an address? Is it named? No. So by your reasoning, this didn't exist and the women spent all night standing up outside not sleeping on benches.
And your idiotic attempt to compare people who would pay to spend money sleeping on a rope IF THEY HAD OTHER OPTIONS to people making a choice to sleep over a rope if that's the only option they had is yet further example of your fervent BELIEF that it didn't happen, which isn't going to be swayed by logic.
So now the only point of being on this thread is not to convince you, because really, it's not going to happen, but merely point out, over and over, how flawed and shoddy your logic and mental acuity is.
And thanks for admitting you lied and slandered a book you hadn't read for your own agenda. Quite the devoted true believer you are willing to do whatever oily thing to promote your cause despite the evidence. Says it all doesn't it?
And since you ask. No I have never lied about someone else to get people stirred up about something I knew was false. That's the tactic of conmen. I find it rather despicable.
The article focused on the plight of the poor, not on an individual doss house. So why would it be named? By your pitiful reasoning skills, there were no doss houses, and the poor didn't sleep on benches either.
Why? Here:
Read this account of a homeless shelter, written up in the pall mall. Is there an address? Is it named? No. So by your reasoning, this didn't exist and the women spent all night standing up outside not sleeping on benches.
And your idiotic attempt to compare people who would pay to spend money sleeping on a rope IF THEY HAD OTHER OPTIONS to people making a choice to sleep over a rope if that's the only option they had is yet further example of your fervent BELIEF that it didn't happen, which isn't going to be swayed by logic.
So now the only point of being on this thread is not to convince you, because really, it's not going to happen, but merely point out, over and over, how flawed and shoddy your logic and mental acuity is.
And thanks for admitting you lied and slandered a book you hadn't read for your own agenda. Quite the devoted true believer you are willing to do whatever oily thing to promote your cause despite the evidence. Says it all doesn't it?
And since you ask. No I have never lied about someone else to get people stirred up about something I knew was false. That's the tactic of conmen. I find it rather despicable.
Comment