The EU debate - Part III

There's an echo in here, I think I laughed at you saying that not many minutes ago.

 

We've got ourselves a nice little Nazi, racist, fascist bigot club going on, it's really fun.

 

Of course you can Convenient that when I've asked you to provide the alternative evidence that you have, you suddenly 'can't be bothered' to post it

As I've repeated to you, it matters little what I think, I'm dealing with facts.

I've never said we shouldn't be funding housing for foreigners, I've said that the Royals should pay for Buck house refurb themsleves, or open it up to tourists and generate the income to pay for it.

 

I can see that you're on the defensive because I've called you out.

Classic tactic from the bullshitter, claim they are 'amused' when they've been done

 

Don't you want the EU to rule you?

 

Of course you can Convenient that when I've asked you to provide the alternative evidence you have, you suddenly 'can't be bothered' to post it

As I've repeated to you, it matters little what I think, I'm dealing with facts.

I've never said we shouldn't be funding housing for foreigners, I've said that the Royals should pay for Buck house refurb themsleves, or open it up to tourists and generate the income to pay for it.[/QUOTE]

I really couldn't give a toss mate. If you want to claim victory, fill your boots, I'm not arguing.

It's a small price to pay for the amusement the rest brings, especially knowing that, you being factual or not changes nothing in reality. Liz still has more homes than you have bedrooms.

If we get rid of lizzy and her houses, and share the dosh between us, are you going to use your money to give let the homeless live with you?

 

How the **** is agreeing with you and telling you you're right, me being on the defensive?

 

He's ahead of you though, he's got his to speak the local lingo.

 

Ballymore's finest. The Irish may not approve of your posts!

 

I'm not claiming victory, I'm asking you to provide the evidence of your alternative economics that you said you had.

 

So you now agree that the Royal Family cost the taxpayer £334m per year. A while ago you were saying that they brought in a fortune

Make your mind up

 

and I'm giving you the same answer I did every other time you got demanding....in fact no, scratch that.

You're absolutely 100% right, I totally made it up.

There ya go.

 

I shouldn't think they would give a toss tbh. Maybe they would if I was employed by them, but hey, what do I know. You're the expert on these matters

I would think the DSS would be more concerned with you spending all day posting on here instead of being out looking for a job.

 

I gathered that when I called you out and asked for your evidence

 

Keep still you dopey tart, you're ****ing up quotes on double time.

Anyway, had you not got so giddy, you could have read the previous reply.

You're 100% right,

Brill eh. I guess that means Liz is evicted, and you're taking in homeless people at your expense. Everyone's happy.

 

The Queen is not the ruler. You don't seem to understand the British Constitution.

 

I think he sees her as a measure of success.

 

Are you claiming that you didn't say that they generate a fortune ?

 

Nope, I'm saying I said it and your were so full of evidence I realised how wrong I was.

Saying in several replies really added to the strength of your argument.

 

So what quote did I **** up then ?