Fire at Arlington

It has been reported today that at approximately 02:00 a fire started at Arlington House on the 11th floor.

Thanet Gazette Story on Arlington Fire

I hope that everyone is alright and that any affected residents are able to return to their homes soon.

I also hope that people will join me in condemning the words of Robert John Wheeler on Facebook:


If this is the limit of his empathy and sympathy with people potentially faced with serious injury or death, then I can easily see why he has not received an hospitable welcome from some on the No Tesco… page (aside from his misrepresentations about various ‘facts’).

Robert, merely because you have a disagreement with *some* people on the No Tesco… page, *some* of whom *may* live in Arlington House, there is no excuse for such abhorrent words. You are effectively implying that you wish people had had their homes destroyed and without any wishes that those people would escape unharmed.

Shame on you, Robert John Wheeler. Shame on you.


74 thoughts on “Fire at Arlington

  1. I’m sure they will welcome that James, I’m sure your contribution there is as valueless as your contribution everywhere else. I might have to stop in there sometime now, as clearly the clientel will be improved .

    Sadly Geoff, your attempt outrage is sadly as shallow as the intentions of the nimbys trying to defend parking spaces they don;t own 🙂

    One day, hopefuly the blight that is the slum at Arlington will no longer pollute the Margate seafront.

    • John,

      There’s no attempt at outrage here. It’s genuine outrage that the very first thing someone does upon hearing there was a fire at a residential block of flats is to express regret that the fire was extinguished.


    • Yes, but that isn’t what Robert John Wheeler said; he ‘merely’ expressed regret that the fire was put out. I don’t for one second believe that he would actually advocate deliberate arson.

      • Ah, I see. Looking over the Yes page’s post, I would say that the language does seem stronger but I would still say it is not encouraging the burning down of Arlington House as such, but again lamenting that the fire was extinguished.

      • arent the comments incitement? there are some crazy people out there that might take what was said as encouragemnt

      • Agreed, but then there are crazy people who would take a TV advert for Eastenders as a message to start doing what they do. As much as I think the posts and words are disgusting (by calling on people to ‘mourn’ the fire being extinguished) I really don’t think they can be called encouragement or advocation.

  2. Oh James, everytime I think your posts could get any more stupid, you prove they can!

    Keep that comedy coming!

  3. at least Geoff you allow freedom of speech unlike Yes to Arlington. btw Checkers I can view your FB utterances despite your silly block.

      • Not at all my boy, I am just employing the standards utilised by the nimby page 🙂

        Stop whining there’s a good boy.

      • John,

        You banned people from the Yes page long before you were banned from the No page. They were merely responding in kind to your own actions. And they gave you more than enough chances to rein the bile in a bit. You were banned for insulting people and presenting lies and misinformation as fact, with no associated evidence.

        You banned me merely for not toeing the party line and for pointing out the repugnant comment by Robert John Wheeler. You couldn’t repudiate what I said, so banned me instead.


  4. Your not banned James, unlike myself when you couldn’t come up with answers when your bullshit was challenged elsewhere. We need something to laugh at, and you fill that role nicely. Sadly with Geoff, dealing with his bullshit was like kicking a kitten.

    • oh dear hammy unable to read no wonder you make such a mess of responding. back on your wheel and do something useful

    • John,

      You were banned from the No page for making vicious, unfounded insults. That’s it. What small part of your posts which were not filled with invective were full of errors, which you refused to correct and insisted on blindly repeating were true. Even though you could not offer one single shred of evidence.

      I, on other hand, was banned from the Yes page merely for offering an alternative viewpoint and for not toeing your party line. The facts have been posted on this blog and are clear to see.


      • Unfounded, nope, I post factual information and that is why I was banned my special lil fool 🙂

        You were banned because you are a cock who bought nothing but bullshit to the “Yes” page. James is like my little pet that I keep around because he amuses me, you on the other hand are more like a mosquito, an annoying little prick that serves no purpose 😉

        (oh and it’s towing dumbfuck 😉 )

      • John,

        You never posted a single factual post. It was all lies, misinformation and invective.

        As you keep proving, you cannot refute my comments through argument so resort to insults. All that does is expose how weak you are.

        I thought spelling/grammar attacks were the last resort of the useless? That’s what you said, anyways (paraphrased). But no John, it *is* “toeing”, not “towing”.


  5. Bless you James, it seems once again your constant stream of incorrect bullshit continues.

    How did the conversation go with Cardys lawyers when you made false accusations against them?

    • John,

      All you do is make false accusations against people, then silence those who seek to point that out. You can’t refute what they say, you can only resort to cover-ups and censorship.

      You are weak. If you had any conviction or abilities to defend your stance, dissenting opinion would be allowed to stay.


      • Never made a false accusation yet my boy.

        I asked if you could come up with a good reason you should be allowed to stay on the “Yes” page when thus far your only contribution had been bullshit, and you failed. I don;t see why you should be allowed a platform for your bullshit, when I find myself banned by peon’s who cannot backup an argument they have lost at every stage.

        Sadly it is the nimbys that are weak and petty minded, and their arguments have been dismissed, quite rightly at every turn.

        predictably Geoff, you expect special treatment, but add nothing to the discussion. You have nothing to offer, and expect to be allowed to post on a page, when the same luxury is not afforded to others.

        When or if you ever find something interesting or intelligent to say, drop me a line biy, till then I’ll leave you and James to whine at each other, and make up some bullshit which only the 2 of you are stupid enough to swallow whole 😉

        John 🙂

      • John.

        All you can do is insult people and present lies and misrepresentations as facts, with no evidence to back up your claims.

        You were banned for making insults. That’s it. If you’d managed to rein in your bile for just a second you would still be able to post.

        The only reason you banned me is because I wouldn’t toe the party line and was pointing out the reprehensible comments of one of your lackeys. You couldn’t defend him, so resorted to banning me.

        If you had any convictions in what you purport to believe in, you would have allowed my comments to stand. The fact that you chose censorship instead speaks volumes.


    • Hammy why don’t you post on my blog. Oh I know why, nothing to say. Still when you run out of places to post give it a try. Go and do something productive and get back on your wheel

      • You have yer to prove any wrongdoing for to to counter James. You merely post your usual inane bullshit for the gullible and naive to swallow.

        As you hace a history of running and hiding from both me, and cardy’s solicitors when challenged, i have ndoubt that i would be censoredthere as you had to censor me from the FORS page when i consistantly proved you post nothing but lies and bullshit.

        Now off with you, i’msure you have a gullible tard to try to impress 😉

      • interesting commentary, factually inaccurate as usual. Facebook removed you from Friends of Ramsgate due to all the complaints they received and why on earth would Cardy’s lawyer want to speak with me.
        Now if it were the police talking to you that I would understand but then you aren’t real are you hammy.

  6. No lies or mis representations Barnes, all i post is true, and accurate, the evidence abounds my boy. You were challenged and found severerly wanting, yet you hypocritically expect to be allowed to remain on a group whose admins are not accorded the same platforn on the nimby site.

    Your mummy may tolerate your foot stamping petulance Barnes, I will not. 😉


    • John,

      ALL you post are lies and misrepresentations, along with unfounded and vicious insults.

      You didn’t “challenge” me at all. All you did was insult me then ban me for not toeing the party line.

      The “same platform” does not apply. You were banned for making said insults and were offered the chance numerous times to stay as long as you kept your posts civil. You failed, so were banned. That’s it.

      Even now, you can’t resist stooping to insults. If you have such a good case, then why not actually make it, rather than resorting to such actions?


      • No I didn;t challenge you Barnes I simply bettered you my boy, and with embarassing ease,

        You were offered the chance to stay if yo could either post something intelligent, or give a good reason as to why I should allow you to stay and continue to post your bullshit. You failed on bith counts.

        I make my case to thise capable of understanding it, clearly that is WAY above your pay grade my boy.

        You claim I post lies and mis representations, yet fail to name a single example of either, yet the lies and misrepresntations of the nimbys are legion, well known and have been dismissed at every turn by everyone.

        Their case is weak you are a bullshiting fool, and I look forward to shopping in Tesco’s in Margate 🙂

      • John,

        You didn’t “better” me at all. You fail to address every single of your failings at every turn and instead rely on insults rather than making your case.

        You have been completely defeated at all stages; the fact that you refuse to see that and resort to abusive posts demonstrates how lacking in credibility you are.

        Your offer to me to stay was not based on intelligence, but rather you wanting me to say something which you agreed with. And that’s the problem; any dissenting or alternative viewpoint on the Yes page is ruthlessly censored, but you dress that up as an inability to comment.

        My posts all speak for themselves, as do yours. You have yet to offer one shred of evidence which has not been misrepresented by you.


  7. PPS spelling attacks are usually the preserve of the defeated, but in your case, it is simply a case of the victor ridiculing the cock 😉

    You have a great day Geoff, try and find someone to take you seriously, that should occupy your morning 😉

    • John,

      Once again proving that you cannot repudiate anything I said, so you resort to insults. And hypocrisy.

      You have a good day too, John. Try to rein the bile in a bit, eh? You might be surprised how good you can feel if you just let all the hate dissipate.


      • I don’t hate you Barnes, you really don’t occupy my thoughts beyond kicking you around on the internet for amusement,

        I pity you, and the poor bastards who have to care for you 😉

      • John,

        Back to insults again. Same old, same old. Oh and I see you’ve thrown in a comment about ‘carers’ this time. That really does seem to be your favourite put-down, that any who have an opposing or different view to yours must be in some kind of care.

        It was more a comment on your general hate, which seems to be limitless.


  8. Once again Barnes proves he has nothing to offer but empty accusations he simply can;t backup or evidence in any way.

    Have a great day Barnes, perhaps a carer to will you to the park, you now bore me.

    • John,

      All of my claims are backed up by evidence which is clear to all who are not blinded by hate and fear. The fact that you are unable to see the truth of what I post merely proves my point that you lack credibility and can only resort to insults.


      • the part about carers has been lifted from John Holyer on Michael’s blog. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I simply believe he doesn’t have any original thoughts

      • I suppose it makes sense that they’d all share the same set of low morals: they all like to make insults; they all like to denigrate and belittle those who require care; and they all think that it’s a shame that people’s homes didn’t burn down.

        Amazingly, when this is pointed out they then moan at being “attacked” and “singled out”.

        Personally, I refuse to be lectured on morality by a bunch of thuggish, reprehensible individuals.

  9. I await the day that Barnes and James prove thier organs wouldn’t be better utilised as cat food.

    No sign as yet. (james, best look up the word “prove” i know it’s a mystery to you boy 😉 )

  10. We’ve always found John Hamilton to be an inexhaustible source of both marvel and dismay. He is unsurpassed in the field of refuting all contrary opinions just by referring to “poor thing, my dear boy, nimby etc.”

    Adopting a comedic air of lofty disdain, whilst refusing to address contrary opinions, is not a valid form of debate Mr Hamilton. You should know that even those predisposed to support the Tesco development are embarrassed to be associated with your cause, however tenuously.

    But I do worry about you … you’ve progressed from hilarious troll to an attention seeker of megalomaniacal stature. Boundaries have been abandoned, perfunctory attempts at societal normality are now just a fuzzy warm memory and caution has clearly been thrown to the wind.

    It is astonishing what humans are capable of.

    • I concur. I’ve seen many comments by people who support the Yes to Tesco… page who’ve either written directly to the admin (John) or about his actions and he really is his own worst enemy. The slanderous insults and vicious innuendo is putting off many who agree with the overall aims of page, namely that they think a Tesco superstore is the best (or only) way to improve the area.

      What makes it even more amusing is that John and certain of his lackeys complain loudly of being “attacked” or vilified by those on the No page but have absolutely no proof of it ever happening. Then when their own attacks are pointed out, they are either laughed off or dismissed as ‘just revenge’ for how they were treated. In order for something to be a reaction, there first has to actually be an initial action…

  11. Also : Cafe G – I’d rather drink coffee made with Tesco value chicory enhanced granules, low calorie sweeteners and no cream, that had been kept in a flask for 24 hours than I would drink a coffee at your cafe. I’m shocked that a local in your position would have an opinion in the same hemisphere as Hammy.

    • Excellent news for Cafe G, the abandoning of a business by occutards will clearly enhance it’s appeal to everyone else, and as occutards are as lacking in numbers as the intellectually challenged who claim the Arlington slum should be listed, I’m sure that Cafe G will now go on to be a very successful business venture.

      Yep Whatabout, I’m still here, unlike the occutardery 😉

  12. Yep, fewer occutard scum will encourage worthwhile custom from quality patrons.

    See you’re learning Barnes, one day you may even have something to offer, sadly, that day is a LONG way off 😉

    • John,

      According to yourself there are already barely any “occutard scum”.:

      “occutards are as lacking in numbers as the intellectually challenged who claim the Arlington slum should be listed”.

      Consistency really isn’t one of your strong points, is it? Mind you, nor are business acumen, basic mathematics nor any sense of morality, so I guess that all goes hand in hand with being what you are…


  13. Excellent, so the cafe won’t lose many numbers, just some human sewage they are WAY better off without 🙂

    Business isn’t your strong point is it boy, in fact, do you have a strong point, are are you generally this poor…

    • Ha, so I was right and you were wrong. Even when admitting you were wrong you still can’t resist getting in some abusive remarks. And I think any business which welcomes customers who use the term “human sewage” should be avoided by anyone with any sense of morality, which appears to rule you and Robert John Wheeler out for a start.

      My business knowledge is just fine, although I’d suggest yours could do with some serious work.

  14. Oh Barnes, bless you, you really are a clueless tard aren;t you my boy. Let me try and ,make it REALLY simple for you;

    Remove human sewage that are defined as occutards = increased business = increased income = increased profit

    “My business knowledge is just fine” HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA yea right, perhaps get your carer to explain the term “knowledge” it’s clearly a mystery to you 😉

    Excellent, I look forward to enjoying a coffee, knowing that human sewage such as occutards will not pollute the atmosphere, and tards such as you will not be around either.

    • Thanks once again, John, for reinforcing my point about certain customers of Café G and their morality. Like I said, if that’s the standard of customer they wish to attract then it marks the place out as a location to be avoided.

      And we’re back round again to the insults involving carers, making my point for me yet again. And it’s not even your own insult, you even had to steal that off someone else. But then we’ve already established that you have no sense of morality.

      You really do need a lesson on business, John, if you think that any business would survive in the long run by practising segregation, removing people based purely on political stance and accepting customers who openly refer to others as “human sewage”.

      I know they say ‘there’s no such thing as bad publicity’, but I’d imagine that if this happened and word spread, that would pretty much destroy the business.

  15. I am pleased to hear that Margate’s scum will not be bothering a worthwhile business. I shall make sure to frequent it as often as possible, unbothered by human sewage,a and their apologists 🙂

    Nothing to do with politics my boy, it’s more a case of not wanting to pollute a pleasant atmosphere with scum such as yourself, occutards and the likes of James. No run along mu lil lad, and try to get your carer to explain business 101 to you 😉

    • “occutards” “Nothing to do with politics”. I think you need to brush up on your understanding of political terminology, John, along with business. “Occupy” is a political/economic movement and “occutard” is an insult used by those of a differing political stance to belittle and demean them.

      As I said, any business which welcomes people who would use such terms is one worthy of avoiding.

      And back again to the stolen insults. Mind you, we’ve all seen it doesn’t work at all when you try your own…

  16. Occutards are simply naive anti capitalist morons, only ever taken seriously by the fundamentally naive, politics doesn’t enter into it my boy 😉

    I am more than happy that you avoid places where your betters congregate, it makes a far better environment for those of us who chose not to frequent businesses that welcome scum. 😉

    • John,

      You prove you understand very little about Occupy and the insult “occutard”. Both relate to people who are part of a political/economic movement, with one term used by themselves and the other used by those who disagree with them. The fact that you even use the term “anti capitalist” in a statement trying to prove it has nothing to do with politics reveals how little you truly know. Both capitalism and anti-capitalism are political ideas as well as economic ones.

      Once again John, any business which welcomes customers who describe others as “scum” is one to be deservedly avoided.


  17. Oh god no Barnes, I have met and ridiculed many occutards, they are 100% naive foolish clowns, with a VERY childish and gullible view of the world, no wonder you look upto them.

    I LOVE reading you trying to defend your stupidity Barnes, it’s highly amusing, keep it up. I on the other hand am going to enjoy coffee’s with no scum in the vicinity to spoil the ambiance. The fact that the scum such as yourself and the occutards avoid it, clearly makes it VERY attractive to everyone else in Thanet

    • John, I sincerely doubt you’ve ever had the gumption to meet anyone with different views to your own, let alone ridicule them. You say they have a “childish and gullible view”, well I would say you have a very selfish and thuggish one, whereby anyone with differing viewpoints is to be ruthlessly silenced and insulted.

      Unlike yourself, John, I am a realist. I know that we need things like banks and large corporations; that’s just the way the world works. But I sympathise with some of the Occupy tenets, particularly when the individual and small business is held to standards which are much stricter than those for big business (such as tax avoidance). I guess you could say that my strongest feeling on the subject is that there should be a level, fair playing field, where all parties are expected to abide by the spirit of the law (rather than just the loophole-ridden letter). So I don’t agree with anywhere near all of their ideals, just some of them. Just as I agree with some of the benefits of big business, but not all.

      No doubt you will now take this completely out of context and use it as ‘proof’ of something or other, which you do with depressing regularity. I look forward to seeing such a post on the Yes page, where you insult me and try to ridicule me with no chance of me responding. At least here I provide you with the opportunity to reply, instead of hiding behind censorship and claiming it as a victory.

      As I said before John, if you had any conviction in what you write, you would allow dissenting opinion. The fact that you don’t speaks volumes about your inabilities and fears.

  18. Gumption? That i would never choose to be in the company of scum such as you, dishonest dumbfucks such as james, or human sewage such as occutards is simply desiring to spend time in the company of worthwhile people, not worthless oxygen thieves.

    I look forward to the nimby group accommodating differing opinion, maybe then, I will allow dumbfucks such as you back on the correct “yes” group. Till then, your hypocrisy is noted, again

    • John,

      The No page permits differing opinion, which is why those such as Peter Checksfield are still permitted to post (even though I think he’s a huge hypocrite, but seeing as I’m not an admin of the No page, that’s not my call). The main reason you were banned was because of your unrelenting insults. You were given plenty of opportunity to keep posting as long as you kept it civil, which you decided to ignore, then you were banned.

      You, on the other hand, banned people merely for having different opinions. But I doubt you’ll be able to see the difference between the two types of ban, as you seem to think that you should be able to post whatever you like (including making disparaging and slanderous remarks) whilst also being able to precisely control people’s own (polite) remarks to make sure they toe your line.

      Even people on the Yes page are starting to point out that you’re going off the rails a bit…

  19. Clearly you seem to even be unaware of the definition of differing opinion. Sadly that illustrates the appalling standard of your posts, and hence why you were banned. Dumbfucks, fools, liars and occutards will always be banned from the yes site. to keep up the average IQ, clearly you have no place on the site, no matter how much you whine. I will keep James though, every site needs a resident idiot, and he fills that role nicely.

    One day, if the nimbys allow differing opinion, I may allow you to return, so I may ridicule you to a wider audience.

    • so using your own logic hammy I’m not stupid because I would have been banned. you are funny hammy. logic not your strong point heh!!

      • I think everyone can agree on that Barry. Logic (along with linguistics skills) seems to elude John at every turn, as he keeps on demonstrating.

    • John,

      There’s no whining here from anyone except you. You didn’t like being banned from the No page for your vicious insults, so decided to return the favour and wield the banhammer on anyone who you couldn’t defeat through innuendo and baseless insults.

      The Yes page allows plenty of differing opinion, unlike yourself. Peter Checksfield, for example, still posts quite happily.


  20. *Sign*,

    ” I will keep James though, every site needs a resident idiot, and he fills that role nicely.”

    Now James are you really such a dumbfuck that even that very very simple sentence is a mystery to you, James and of course Barnes ;)…

    You were banned for being a clueless fuckwit, who failed to make an intelligent post when challenged (or before being challenged). Very simple my boy. PLEASE try and keep up.

    “The Yes page allows plenty of differing opinion, unlike yourself. Peter Checksfield, for example, still posts quite happily” HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you name 1, oh dear, you really are a funny little man Barnes, hypocrisy clearly sits comfortably with you,

    • John,

      I named Peter Checksfield because in my opinion he is a sycophantic hypocrite who hides behind a veneer of politeness, then runs away to you for a pat on the head. However, he is (usually) outwardly polite so is still permitted to post on the No page. The only other people who have been banned from the No page are ones such as yourself, who couldn’t keep the insults reined in. And even then they are very rarely banned, they just have the offensive post(s) deleted.

      And you yourself say that you only keep one person from the No page on your group, so at the very least there is parity, even according to your own words.

      Please keep posting, John, you are doing an excellent job at demolishing your own credibility.

  21. Ah, credibility, an attribute you have yet to enjoy.

    Oh dear Barnes, do you have a brain injury, or are you simply a complete fucktard? As I said, “Dumbfucks, fools, liars and occutards will always be banned” and ”I will keep James though, every site needs a resident idiot, and he fills that role nicely.” That covers your removal perfectly.

    There are several nimbys who post on the YES site from time to time. Clearly you weren’t bright enough, as you proved when challenged.

  22. Never happened yet Barnes my boy 😉

    Your foolishness however is not only well known, but very entertaining 🙂

  23. Never happened yet Barnes my boy 😉

    Your foolishness however is not only well known, but very entertaining 🙂

    • John,

      You’ve ably demonstrated that you have the hang of copy/pasting, yet can’t seem to muster up any evidence to back up any of your claims. I wonder why that is…?

      I await your first evidence of, well, anything you’ve said actually.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s