Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its been reported that he had robust debate with restaurant staff about Brexit/government etc.etc after staff being unhappy of him dining there...Fair play to both sides...perhaps more MP's/politicos should be button-holed/accosted about the shamefull state of British politics....Discuss.... "Would loved to have been there and heard about the supposed benefits of Brexit from him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its been reported that he had robust debate with restaurant staff about Brexit/government etc.etc after staff being unhappy of him dining there...Fair play to both sides...perhaps more MP's/politicos should be button-holed/accosted about the shamefull state of British politics....Discuss....
Would loved to have been there and heard about the supposed benefits of Brexit from him. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its been reported that he had robust debate with restaurant staff about Brexit/government etc.etc after staff being unhappy of him dining there...Fair play to both sides...perhaps more MP's/politicos should be button-holed/accosted about the shamefull state of British politics....Discuss.... "So he’s not allowed to go and have a peaceful meal without having his meal spoilt by twats who are there to serve him then ? I’m not a fan of his but they are there to pro it’s service  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it wouldn't be legal to deny admittance to someone because they lead the Brexit campaign " They didnt deny him the owner served him the 1st time as staff didnt want to, after talking to him he went back again and the staff did serve him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it wouldn't be legal to deny admittance to someone because they lead the Brexit campaign " It would be illegal to deny him service just because of his political persuasion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it wouldn't be legal to deny admittance to someone because they lead the Brexit campaign It would be illegal to deny him service just because of his political persuasion. " Is it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it? " doubtful | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it? doubtful " Very doubtful, it isn’t a protected characteristic | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it wouldn't be legal to deny admittance to someone because they lead the Brexit campaign It would be illegal to deny him service just because of his political persuasion. Is it? " I don't know the answer, however... A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) case, GMB v Henderson, has confirmed that the Equality Act 2010 (EqA) affords protection from discrimination relating to philosophical/political beliefs. I would assume this also could be the case outside of the workplace being that the Equality Act 2010 is cited | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person." The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation." Hate crime?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime? "According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about."Hate crime? Hilarious | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious "I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately. Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome. Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?"Do you think it is a hate crime ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ? "It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws."Let me know when it goes to court | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court "Who said it was going to court? The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you."Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court "The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem. Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?"That’s correct, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct, "So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct,
So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set?"Can you prove that Cummings wasn’t served because of his ‘political beliefs’ ? The restaurant staff who refused might have just thought he was a cunt , is being a cunt a protected characteristic? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court "Why would it go to court? when he was served.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct,
So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set?
Can you prove that Cummings wasn’t served because of his ‘political beliefs’ ? The restaurant staff who refused might have just thought he was a cunt , is being a cunt a protected characteristic? "I'd like to refer you to your earlier comment 'Very doubtful, it isn’t a protected characteristic' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct,
So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set?
Can you prove that Cummings wasn’t served because of his ‘political beliefs’ ? The restaurant staff who refused might have just thought he was a cunt , is being a cunt a protected characteristic?
I'd like to refer you to your earlier comment
'Very doubtful, it isn’t a protected characteristic'
"It isn’t, for example, if I called a conservative voter a ‘Tory wanker’ would that be classed as hate speech that ‘could ‘ lead to prosecution? Discuss | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court Why would it go to court? when he was served. "No idea, why ‘could ‘ it be a hate crime? When he was served | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct,
So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set?
Can you prove that Cummings wasn’t served because of his ‘political beliefs’ ? The restaurant staff who refused might have just thought he was a cunt , is being a cunt a protected characteristic?
I'd like to refer you to your earlier comment
'Very doubtful, it isn’t a protected characteristic'
It isn’t, for example, if I called a conservative voter a ‘Tory wanker’ would that be classed as hate speech that ‘could ‘ lead to prosecution? Discuss "Hate speech is different to discrimination. I see you want to agree that a precedent has been set but refuse to admit it. Maybe the judge got the law wrong. He/She clearly doesn't know as much as you do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He can be refused service as this is at the discretion of staff and management on and in licensed premises in Scotland, you do not need any excuse as to why you are not going to serve a person. The Herald seem to think they could've been prosecuted under hate crime legislation. Hate crime?
According to SNP legislation. You can laugh all you like but being that The Herald said it (they also own The National, SNP's biggest supporter) I'm gonna hazard a guess that they know what they're talking about.
Hate crime? Hilarious
I see you haven't improved your level of debate anytime lately.
Can you prove it isn't a hate crime? I've already provided a newspapers view aswell as a recent tribunal's outcome.
Or is it just gonna continue to be your usual playground tactics?
Do you think it is a hate crime ?
It doesn't matter what I think, I don't make the laws.
Let me know when it goes to court
Who said it was going to court?
The Herald said they could be prosecuted under Hate Crime Legislation. Not that they were being. Learn to read will you.
Could ? I think we should stick to facts , not if, buts and maybes, give me a shout when it goes to court
The facts are that staff refused to serve him and he could have chosen to prosecute but chose not to make it a problem.
Are you disputing the precedent set? You are aware the precedents are used in law aren't you?
That’s correct,
So you'll agree that political beliefs are a protected characteristic citing the precedent set?
Can you prove that Cummings wasn’t served because of his ‘political beliefs’ ? The restaurant staff who refused might have just thought he was a cunt , is being a cunt a protected characteristic?
I'd like to refer you to your earlier comment
'Very doubtful, it isn’t a protected characteristic'
It isn’t, for example, if I called a conservative voter a ‘Tory wanker’ would that be classed as hate speech that ‘could ‘ lead to prosecution? Discuss
Hate speech is different to discrimination. I see you want to agree that a precedent has been set but refuse to admit it.
Maybe the judge got the law wrong. He/She clearly doesn't know as much as you do."Show me this ‘precedent ‘ , I am guessing it must be a very similar case to the one involving Cummings ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Its been reported that he had robust debate with restaurant staff about Brexit/government etc.etc after staff being unhappy of him dining there...Fair play to both sides...perhaps more MP's/politicos should be button-holed/accosted about the shamefull state of British politics....Discuss.... "I caught this on the news to. To me it shows sensible debate is more persuasive than getting mad and insulting people. I hear as others have mentioned he returned to the restaurant to chat to them answering their questions and concerns in a calm collective manner. The next day returned to dine without any problems.I don't know how the law stands on such situations but I would not like to see people refused service due to their political beliefs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"perhaps they could have just made him wait for a hour or two between courses and then apologise saying the lack of staff meant delays "Fortunately they did not feel the need to make things up | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reports are that the serving staff were unhappy with him being there but he wasnt refused service. He then returned on a pre-arranged visit to talk and debate with the serving staff. Robust views were exchanged and there was no animosity when he and his family returned the next day for dinner. " Well, for all his many faults, at least he's prepared to engage with people who question his views. Boris just steals your phone or hides in a fridge. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
