The EU debate - Part III

I have disputed the content twice. Again, as is your right, you've chosen not to answer but don't let that stop you from attacking the poster.

 

If you're so desperate to know you could very easily find out yourself.

 

Look at all these engineers and scientists.

 

I'm not desperate to know the source. I'm intrigued as to why none is provided. The last few posts suggests to me it was his intention that he'd be picked up on it so he could warble on again about "attacking the poster".

 

Definitely last comment before bed....you don't want to debate anything, your debating style is about as subtle as a punch in the face.
The only thing that is tedious is this constant cry for attention that you seem to have. Post something that you know other posters will challenge, spend the next 20 pages claiming you never said it, but never really answering any question posed and then try to claim some kind of moral victory.
And I'm the nobhead......

 

I think he's turned you against him in record time.

 

continued page 94

 

What are your views on the issues raised by the content? Unless I've missed some, they're not in your replies. Look.

 

So another post with just pithy personal comments, and none of your views on the issues raised by the articles posted.

Yep, I'd say nobhead's fair comment.

 

Well you've managed to miss the first time I asked and quote the second time I asked and still miss it. It's at the end of the last post you quoted if you'd like a clue.

 

He won't provide the source for the same reasons that I tend not to, nobody can refute the content so they go to their stock replies (like you) of:-

'It's right wing!'
'The journalist is conservative!'
'The Daily Mail!? Automatically not true!'
'The Express!? Your IQ must be in the single digits!'
'The Telegraph!? More like The Torygraph!'
'Breitbart!? They're racists!'
'He contributes to Fox News it's definitely not true!'

etc. etc.

 

Nope, that was just some one eyed waffle on your opinion of the website. You're clearly not up to forming an opinion on the content.

What are you doing on a discussion forum?

 

I've told them as much, but they still just blether on doing it.

They rarely have an opinion, they just 'object'.

 

right wing .,.. right wing .... right wing ..... you've nothing to say at all

 

Anyone could refute the content of your dross. You'll still rant about how immigrants and their children and grandchildren are ruining the country so it's pointless despite being a second generation immigrant yourself.

 

I don't know what website it was from but I've questioned one of the themes of the article, politely, as you requested and you don't respond.

 

**** me, I'm supposed to pick through the dross to find one daft comment you drew from one of a number of articles? (which aren't MINE by the way) Way to go lightning.

In answer to your question, no strong leaders don't have to be right wing, as Putin demonstrates. He seems to be the one coming out of this with the most credibility and looks the most like a statesman.

 

That all seems pretty much spot on to me!...

 

There's so much irony in this post, especially considering the current discussion.

 

Well I only had to point it out three times but you did eventually respond.

If you're going to go to the effort of doing your Pete impression and spamming the thread with whatever long article you can find which slags off the EU then it's not too much to ask for a response. You're the one supposedly craving debate.