ChatterBank0 min ago
English Defence League
61 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/34jvef5
I have in the past mostly supported the Daily Mail when accused of sensationalised reporting.
Well this time it appears that they are indeed guilty of this while at the same time appealing for the Muslim readership.
What a load of over generalisation, useless non-facts, a complete one-sided investigation aimed at criminalising the EDL, an investigation that would be more at home in The Guardian than the Mail.
Could one imagine a similar investigation into some of the thugs that attended the recent students riots, or perhaps those thugs of the UAF or maybe Muslim Against Crusades?
I have in the past mostly supported the Daily Mail when accused of sensationalised reporting.
Well this time it appears that they are indeed guilty of this while at the same time appealing for the Muslim readership.
What a load of over generalisation, useless non-facts, a complete one-sided investigation aimed at criminalising the EDL, an investigation that would be more at home in The Guardian than the Mail.
Could one imagine a similar investigation into some of the thugs that attended the recent students riots, or perhaps those thugs of the UAF or maybe Muslim Against Crusades?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
ahem........
1. Did you mean 'definitely' ? It is so difficult to tell sometimes.
2. I said 'stupidly blinkered'....I didn't call AOG stupid; any inferrence is entirely his own.............
3. I thought you were stating the fact that this chap works as some sort commendation; I merely sought to point out that many odious people work/ed - Peter Sutcliffe, Harold Shipman, etc.
4. Racists tend to prefer their targets to be brown (or darker), looking a little swarthy may just indicate that one is from Cornwall, or recently returned from abroad.
5. Naturally, when I asked if you have been glue-sniffing, I meant overdosing on the Sanatogen Tonic. Apologies for the misunderstanding.
1. Did you mean 'definitely' ? It is so difficult to tell sometimes.
2. I said 'stupidly blinkered'....I didn't call AOG stupid; any inferrence is entirely his own.............
3. I thought you were stating the fact that this chap works as some sort commendation; I merely sought to point out that many odious people work/ed - Peter Sutcliffe, Harold Shipman, etc.
4. Racists tend to prefer their targets to be brown (or darker), looking a little swarthy may just indicate that one is from Cornwall, or recently returned from abroad.
5. Naturally, when I asked if you have been glue-sniffing, I meant overdosing on the Sanatogen Tonic. Apologies for the misunderstanding.
vibrasphere
I do not know what it has got to do with you, but when I addressed Jackthehat's rather rude, aggressive and insulting post
ie. /// Have you taken to glue-sniffing AOG ? ///
/// Perhaps his girl-friend is not terribly 'brown' looking ? ///
/// This really ranks highly in your top ten stupidly blinkered posts (and there is a great deal of competition for the honours there!).///
Just why does anyone address another ABer like this, disagree all you like but there are ways of doing this without the need for insults etc,
I automatically assumed he was male, because of his/her username, normally I would apologise since she is female, but having re-read her offensive remarks I have decided not to do so in this instance.
Even if the person is male or female, they should not first dish out the dirt, without expecting to receiver some in return.
vibrasphere Your post is just as aggressive and all you are doing is stirring things up, I do not know why I am always accused of being the culprit when some on here are much more rude than ever I am, and I still stand by my word, I am never aggressive, rude or insulting unless first provoked.
I do not know what it has got to do with you, but when I addressed Jackthehat's rather rude, aggressive and insulting post
ie. /// Have you taken to glue-sniffing AOG ? ///
/// Perhaps his girl-friend is not terribly 'brown' looking ? ///
/// This really ranks highly in your top ten stupidly blinkered posts (and there is a great deal of competition for the honours there!).///
Just why does anyone address another ABer like this, disagree all you like but there are ways of doing this without the need for insults etc,
I automatically assumed he was male, because of his/her username, normally I would apologise since she is female, but having re-read her offensive remarks I have decided not to do so in this instance.
Even if the person is male or female, they should not first dish out the dirt, without expecting to receiver some in return.
vibrasphere Your post is just as aggressive and all you are doing is stirring things up, I do not know why I am always accused of being the culprit when some on here are much more rude than ever I am, and I still stand by my word, I am never aggressive, rude or insulting unless first provoked.
-- answer removed --
sp1814 & andy-hughes
/// Protecting their faces or disguising their faces?///
If they just wanted to hide their faces surely they could have just wrapped a scarf around their faces, just as those on the UAF & MAC or even the students.
/// To compare that with the riot police protection is surely not serious? the chances of a riot policecman being assaulted are extremely high - hence the protection - whereas the EDL wear disguise only to avoid being arrested for their violkent behaviour. ///
The EDL also need protection, when the UAF & MAC throw stones sticks and flares at them. I have already pointed out all these protesters seem to hide their faces no matter what group they belong to, if that is the reason for the EDL wearing ski masks, as you point out, then why should they be any different?
Once again Andy I thought that we could hold a sensible debate, but once again you lower the tone by having an unnecessary dig at me for reading the Daily Mail. Incidentally if you notice I read most newspapers, so as not to have a blinked view on affairs.
I entered that about Renton not being a racist because he had a Spanish girlfriend, simply to get the reaction that I knew it would. It has gone to prove a long held theory of mine that one is only a racist if one dislikes a person with a darker than dark skin colour, obviously it worked.
The 'VEIL' bit was just a cheeky play on words, losing your sense of humour old man?
/// Protecting their faces or disguising their faces?///
If they just wanted to hide their faces surely they could have just wrapped a scarf around their faces, just as those on the UAF & MAC or even the students.
/// To compare that with the riot police protection is surely not serious? the chances of a riot policecman being assaulted are extremely high - hence the protection - whereas the EDL wear disguise only to avoid being arrested for their violkent behaviour. ///
The EDL also need protection, when the UAF & MAC throw stones sticks and flares at them. I have already pointed out all these protesters seem to hide their faces no matter what group they belong to, if that is the reason for the EDL wearing ski masks, as you point out, then why should they be any different?
Once again Andy I thought that we could hold a sensible debate, but once again you lower the tone by having an unnecessary dig at me for reading the Daily Mail. Incidentally if you notice I read most newspapers, so as not to have a blinked view on affairs.
I entered that about Renton not being a racist because he had a Spanish girlfriend, simply to get the reaction that I knew it would. It has gone to prove a long held theory of mine that one is only a racist if one dislikes a person with a darker than dark skin colour, obviously it worked.
The 'VEIL' bit was just a cheeky play on words, losing your sense of humour old man?
"I do not know what it has got to do with you"
I do - this is a public forum.
"Just why does anyone address another ABer like this, disagree all you like but there are ways of doing this without the need for insults etc"
You do it all the time, there are examples of your rudeness all over this thread.
I do - this is a public forum.
"Just why does anyone address another ABer like this, disagree all you like but there are ways of doing this without the need for insults etc"
You do it all the time, there are examples of your rudeness all over this thread.
"Always quick to spew out insults and name calling when he doesn't like another's post but equally quick to take offence and whinge when posters challenge his half truths and distortions of the news".
"this particular specimen's posting behaviour is too depressingly consistent in its racism, dishonesty, egotism and rudeness"
I couldnt agree more, "blatant hypocrisy" needs to be added to this list too IMO.
"this particular specimen's posting behaviour is too depressingly consistent in its racism, dishonesty, egotism and rudeness"
I couldnt agree more, "blatant hypocrisy" needs to be added to this list too IMO.
Please don't apologise,. I would be disinclined to accept it in any case.
What a deluded Colonel Blimp-type you really seem to be.
Daily you trawl the media for stories to support you world-view; a mixture of rose-tinted spectacles and as many -ists and -phobias as you could shake your walking-stick at..........you then insist on twisting and turning and complaining of ill-use should anyone have the temerity to disagree with you.
Even those who would broadly agree with your sentiments seem to find it difficult to back you............just because it's you.
Rude, aggressive and insulting.............?
Really ?...........no.............really ?!?
I certainly haven't got out of first gear, yet..............
What a deluded Colonel Blimp-type you really seem to be.
Daily you trawl the media for stories to support you world-view; a mixture of rose-tinted spectacles and as many -ists and -phobias as you could shake your walking-stick at..........you then insist on twisting and turning and complaining of ill-use should anyone have the temerity to disagree with you.
Even those who would broadly agree with your sentiments seem to find it difficult to back you............just because it's you.
Rude, aggressive and insulting.............?
Really ?...........no.............really ?!?
I certainly haven't got out of first gear, yet..............
I love to read the AOG threads. He will post a news story and then the mob attack him with insults. They swoop down on him like Vultures.
Everything from glue sniffing to Maybe the district nurse hasn't been in today to change the incontinence pants.
Aog should be given the AnswerBank Tolerance Medal
ATM for AOG
Everything from glue sniffing to Maybe the district nurse hasn't been in today to change the incontinence pants.
Aog should be given the AnswerBank Tolerance Medal
ATM for AOG
I am not having a pop at you for being a Mail reader AOG - I read it every single day, have done for thirty-plus years.
I am not losing my sense of humour - just didn't catch the reference.
If you were baiting me about the 'racist' observation to which i duly responded, that's not really in the spirit of debate is it?
I am not losing my sense of humour - just didn't catch the reference.
If you were baiting me about the 'racist' observation to which i duly responded, that's not really in the spirit of debate is it?
First let me thank 4846 and optics2b for their support, it is much appreciated in this world of rudeness and aggressiveness.
I sometimes wonder why I bother to use this site, because if one doesn't follow the rest of the sheep and post only on subjects that they themselves wish to be aired, or they are in some-way distant to their paticular way of thinking, then they will shower one with insults etc.
Then after being on the end of this abuse, they expect one to cower down to them, and not to retaliate for their rudeness and either try to force one to stop entering posts that are alien to their own particular agenda. They will even try and force one to stop posting on this site, or even report a question or an answer in an attempt to stop others viewing it, (their own type of censorship to stifle free speech).
I refuse to be bullied into submission because I enjoy this site, it is a good leisure activity and a place were one can voice one's own opinions on subjects that in our country of so called 'free speech' one has very little chance to do so, since the media and the politicians refrain from doing so in case it causes offence to certain factions of society.
I know that my posts are perfectly legal, and if some are offended for what I have posted, then that is their problem, but if they care to openly discuss it with me without the use of 'bully boy' tactics then I am perfectly willing to enter into friendly debate and even apologise if I have made a mistake in some way (as I have done in the past), but in some cases, as already shown on this thread, even if I did some would still not accept my apologies.
Even after this, some will still continue in their old ways, but I will continue to point out their aggressiveness, insulting and bully boy tactics, for the more polite ABers to witness.
I sometimes wonder why I bother to use this site, because if one doesn't follow the rest of the sheep and post only on subjects that they themselves wish to be aired, or they are in some-way distant to their paticular way of thinking, then they will shower one with insults etc.
Then after being on the end of this abuse, they expect one to cower down to them, and not to retaliate for their rudeness and either try to force one to stop entering posts that are alien to their own particular agenda. They will even try and force one to stop posting on this site, or even report a question or an answer in an attempt to stop others viewing it, (their own type of censorship to stifle free speech).
I refuse to be bullied into submission because I enjoy this site, it is a good leisure activity and a place were one can voice one's own opinions on subjects that in our country of so called 'free speech' one has very little chance to do so, since the media and the politicians refrain from doing so in case it causes offence to certain factions of society.
I know that my posts are perfectly legal, and if some are offended for what I have posted, then that is their problem, but if they care to openly discuss it with me without the use of 'bully boy' tactics then I am perfectly willing to enter into friendly debate and even apologise if I have made a mistake in some way (as I have done in the past), but in some cases, as already shown on this thread, even if I did some would still not accept my apologies.
Even after this, some will still continue in their old ways, but I will continue to point out their aggressiveness, insulting and bully boy tactics, for the more polite ABers to witness.
/// If you were baiting me about the 'racist' observation to which i duly responded, that's not really in the spirit of debate is it? ///
I did not bait you Andy, it was meant for another, why the Daily Mail in their attempt to alienate a particular member of the EDL found the need to report that he had a Spanish girl friend (what this had got to do with the price of chips) I do not know.
But then I knew because I said he couldn't be racist a certain ABer who I knew would cotton on to this generalised remark and come back at me, stating what the colour of her skin might be, all totally irrelevant, I am afraid.
I did not bait you Andy, it was meant for another, why the Daily Mail in their attempt to alienate a particular member of the EDL found the need to report that he had a Spanish girl friend (what this had got to do with the price of chips) I do not know.
But then I knew because I said he couldn't be racist a certain ABer who I knew would cotton on to this generalised remark and come back at me, stating what the colour of her skin might be, all totally irrelevant, I am afraid.
