WiganWarriorsFans.com

SJ wrote:I notice DaveO is back on line. Will he acknowledge to WW and me and pthers( what others would refer to has fake representation of his banner title to his original post on this topic and counter a claim made by I believe, sarcastically by "fawf off shed" that Dave Is always right
Go on Dave you know you want to.

I must say I took the heading to mean Jack, himself not the charity

I see you not compitant with Semantics SP.
I'm not with spelling. We all have crosses to bare or is it bear. No worries

SJ, Dave O doesn't need to apologise to me, I'm quite capable of comprehending what was written by him without question.
You plough your own furrow and I'll plough mine without any need of help thankyou!!????

I have never asked Dave to apologise to you or me and as to you comprehending what has been posted on this topic your respnces tell me otherwise.

Adjunct.
I disapprove of the direction this topic is going. So I will discontinue in any further dialogue. Which seems will only result in petty insults which heretofore have ended in me putting myself on the naughty step.

SJ wrote:I notice DaveO is back on line. Will he acknowledge to WW and me and pthers( what others would refer to has fake representation of his banner title to his original post on this topic and counter a claim made by I believe, sarcastically by "fawf off shed" that Dave Is always right
Go on Dave you know you want to.

So you want me to dig you out of the hole you dug for yourself? Got to say that takes the biscuit.

FYI when I posted this I cut & pasted the BBC headline which reads "Jet2 asks boy in mobility scooter to 'prove disability'" but then altered it to highlight who it was actually about given the links to Wigan RL. Not my fault you could not be bothered to read past the title but I think it explains a lot

josie andrews wrote:And mine! ????

What makes it worse is that you can guarantee his parents will have made the airline aware they were travelling with a disabled son long before they even travelled. It's routine for anyone who has someone with a disability to do this when travelling on a plane as it is a way to ensure you get boarded taking the disability into account and end up sat together.

Our youngest son is autistic and we do the same thing and I have to say having travelled with Jet2 before they, as most airlines are, were very good. So whoever did this went completely off the script!

For us the issue has sometimes been with other passengers who give us black looks for the privilege of being boarded first when it is in their interest as much as ours we get our son settled in and not anxious. As he is not physically disabled there is no outward sign of any issue so you can see the cogs whirring in their heads wondering why we get the red carpet treatment. We are used to it though as we soon learned the lack of an obvious physical disability has people frowning at you and worse if there was any behavioural issues when out and about. We have become thick skinned about it but if I received the same treatment as in the article I think I would probably snap and end up being arrested!

SJ wrote:I have never asked Dave to apologise to you or me and as to you comprehending what has been posted on this topic your respnces tell me otherwise.

Adjunct.
I disapprove of the direction this topic is going. So I will discontinue in any further dialogue. Which seems will only result in petty insults which heretofore have ended in me putting myself on the naughty step.

In this instance an acknowledgement would be an apology in my book.
If you take being put right on not in my name as an insult I guess you are better not commenting.

Wandering Warrior wrote:

SJ wrote:I have never asked Dave to apologise to you or me and as to you comprehending what has been posted on this topic your respnces tell me otherwise.

Adjunct.
I disapprove of the direction this topic is going. So I will discontinue in any further dialogue. Which seems will only result in petty insults which heretofore have ended in me putting myself on the naughty step.

In this instance an acknowledgement would be an apology in my book.
If you take being put right on not in my name as an insult I guess you are better not commenting.

t






So by your above declaration "acknowledgement "is synonymous " with "apology"
Interesting
BTW Dave in one of his latest posts did acknowledge my opinion if not explicitly implicitly I think he recognised that the article didn't support his banner heading in fact it was Non Sequitur :

SJ wrote:

Wandering Warrior wrote:

SJ wrote:I have never asked Dave to apologise to you or me and as to you comprehending what has been posted on this topic your respnces tell me otherwise.

Adjunct.
I disapprove of the direction this topic is going. So I will discontinue in any further dialogue. Which seems will only result in petty insults which heretofore have ended in me putting myself on the naughty step.

In this instance an acknowledgement would be an apology in my book.
If you take being put right on not in my name as an insult I guess you are better not commenting.

t






So by your above declaration "acknowledgement "is synonymous " with "apology"
Interesting
BTW Dave in one of his latest posts did acknowledge my opinion if not explicitly implicitly I think he recognised that the article didn't support his banner heading in fact it was Non Sequitur :

You could save the NHS a fortune in anaesthetic!????

A similar situation here. This little boy is well known to a lot of Wigan people & on FB

Wigan mum's upset as abusive note is left on car at hospital

https://www.wigantoday.net/news/wigan-m ... -1-9300531

Just because you can’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not there!