The EU debate - Part II

Wahaay, that's just about a nap hand of the diversion techniques favoured by some lightweights on here.

I refer you back to my previous answers to that nonsense and the questions that you STILL haven't answered.

I'll ask it again, because answering it answer's your question.


What race are immigrants?

I'll elaborate this time, as you'll only drip on avoiding it. No doubt you'll still avoid it, but at least your diversion will be different so less tedious (maybe).

The answer is obviously, immigrants can be any race, including the same as us, so to call people racist, and then posting a comment about immigrants as supposed proof, suggests that they hadn't realised that and assumed all immigrants are a different race to us. That's racist thinking.

 

Plenty of ageism in this thread right now.Why?...sensible only,i know its hard but try.

 

see #4970

 

So you were wrong to claim that she didn't, then?

 

Pal, you don't even make featherweight, let alone lightweight...

Except as the champ of deflection and boring others into a coma. At that, you're the super heavyweight champion!

 

Prove it bigot.

Those websites I mentioned, the ones about ****wits chucking the word 'bigot' about without understanding it, say the biggest fools try to claim it's possible to be a selective bigot.

 

I've already said this but we were talking about democracy. I still don't think that a role in an organisation with England in the title is the same as a position relating to England.

 

Oh, in your case, it is. Trust me!...

 

So you can't make racist comments about people of the same skin colour?

This is real news, so we can make racist comments about the French, the Germans, the Irish etc with total impunity in the eyes of the law?

You truly are a thick ****

 

aand STILL just childish abuse

aaaand STILL no proof of claims.

 

They don't come much denser, unless you count Pete...

 

"Another day another attack in Europe from the cancer known as Islam."

armchairblue likes this

Was it even a terrorist attack on that occasion?

http://www.not606.com/threads/the-eu-debate-part-ii.332715/page-17

 

The only thing you've ever demolished is cake.

 

That's all he's good for. He finds insults a lot easier than thinking of something sensible.

 

Almost as popular as the other diversion people use. It's a bad habit some people have, where they use the Irrelevant issue of a persons debate style, to defend their bigoted, racist, friend, in order to defend him without seeming racist and bigoted themselves. Kinda like a faux moral victory. Then continuing to hide this by bringing up pointless "diversions" that people are using in order to put Uncle Pete in his place.

 

Your answering a position of your own making it certainly isn't mine. Read it again and have another go. It just looks like you're avoiding an uncomfortable truth up to now.

 

I'd like it again if the mood took me.......I don't give a **** about who disapproves of my likes.

 

So why object and ask to be kept out of the discussion?

Does it matter to you that in that instance it wasn't a Muslim fundamentalist attack?