Albanians and crime a real problem.

[noseall]

I forgive him, he's on his hols

Back in Blighty.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

So you approve of the British empire historically.???

How do you arrive at that conclusion?

Do you or don't you ??

I think it is a completely irrelevant question, therefore it needs no answer in this thread, and in this context I give it no thought. If you want to discuss the issue so much, why not start a new thread, then anyone can voice their opinion, if they so wish.

Alternatively, if you just want to divert the thread away from the central issue, I suggest you come up with a more interesting, and slightly more relevant topic.

If, on the other hand, you can demonstrate the relevance of your question, to the issues discussed in this thread, I may reconsider.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Yes, immigrant demonising propaganda is morally corrupt. But we can't stop it but we can point out what it is to people and ask them to question what they see, do their own research and hopefully they can come to the conclusion themselves.

So you agree with my sentiments, but disagree with my modus operandi.
I do not disagree with your modus operandi, nor do I oppose it. Please continue with it.
In the meantime I suspect my MO is more effective, but I do not actively oppose your method. But for once, perhaps we can agree to disagree on MOs, whilst agreeing on the sentiment.
A two-pronged opposition is better and more effective than a one-pronged opposition.
I do notice thought that your opposition has only been in evidence very, very recently, and, perhaps, on only one occasion.

We can't talk to them if we call them names, close down discussions, behave in a superior manner. Nobody, quite correctly, should listen to a bully no matter if they have a valid point or not and last time I looked we don't live in an autocratic country.

Describing someone as racist, etc is not calling them names, but giving them an appropriate description based on their activities and behaviour.

I have repeatedly argued that I do not wish to close down any discussion about immigration. I have also repeatedly argued that those who cannot discuss immigration without resorting to the demonising of immigrants, racism, etc, should not participate in that discussion.
When one (and it invariably is one specific poster) repeatedly and persistently posts supposed arguments against immigration by demonising immigrants, they should be prevented from participating in that discussion, in that way.
As you said, "nobody should listen to a bully ...". But you argue that some should be allowed to persist in their demonising behaviour because they are participating in sensible discussion? Their behaviour is not sensible discussion! It is morally corrupt, divisive, hate-filled, ineffective and causes enmity.
I argue that they should be prevented from that discussion until they learn to discuss the issue calmly, sensibly and without resorting to the demonisation of immigrants.
Then we can all have the kind of discussion that you prefer, and without the calls for anyone to be banned.

 

[Bodd]

Is this a general question to anyone?

Nor me

 

[sodthisforfun]

So you agree with my sentiments, but disagree with my modus operandi.
I do not disagree with your modus operandi, nor do I oppose it. Please continue with it.
In the meantime I suspect my MO is more effective, but I do not actively oppose your method. But for once, perhaps we can agree to disagree on MOs, whilst agreeing on the sentiment.
A two-pronged opposition is better and more effective than a one-pronged opposition.
I do notice thought that your opposition has only been in evidence very, very recently, and, perhaps, on only one occasion.


Describing someone as racist, etc is not calling them names, but giving them an appropriate description based on their activities and behaviour.

I have repeatedly argued that I do not wish to close down any discussion about immigration. I have also repeatedly argued that those who cannot discuss immigration without resorting to the demonising of immigrants, racism, etc, should not participate in that discussion.
When one (and it invariably is one specific poster) repeatedly and persistently posts supposed arguments against immigration by demonising immigrants, they should be prevented from participating in that discussion, in that way.
As you said, "nobody should listen to a bully ...". But you argue that some should be allowed to persist in their demonising behaviour because they are participating in sensible discussion? Their behaviour is not sensible discussion! It is morally corrupt, divisive, hate-filled, ineffective and causes enmity.
I argue that they should be prevented from that discussion until they learn to discuss the issue calmly, sensibly and without resorting to the demonisation of immigrants.
Then we can all have the kind of discussion that you prefer, and without the calls for anyone to be banned.

 

[Notch7]

I have repeatedly argued that I do not wish to close down any discussion about immigration

You aren't interested in any positive discussions with anybody that raise the issue of immigration or migrants.

Your approach is just to shut down the discussion. You think you have the moral high ground but actually your divisive attitude can only achieve negativity.

You arent interested in looking at the issues surrounding immigration / migration, your only interested is to keep shouting 'racist'.

I argue that they should be prevented from that discussion until they learn to discuss the issue calmly, sensibly

You dont discuss calmly or sensibly, you just resort to insults and name calling.

What part of 'sensible' is calling posters on here 'radicalised plumbers'

you need to look at your own actions and see how they measure up against your claims for 'calmly, sensibly' .....you will find yourself a country mile short.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

View attachment 147605

You aren't interested in any positive discussions with anybody that raise the issue of immigration or migrants.

Your approach is just to shut down the discussion. You think you have the moral high ground but actually your divisive attitude can only achieve negativity.

You arent interested in looking at the issues surrounding immigration / migration, your only interested is to keep shouting 'racist'.


You dont discuss calmly or sensibly, you just resort to insults and name calling.

What part of 'sensible' is calling posters on here 'radicalised plumbers'

you need to look at your own actions and see how they measure up against your claims for 'calmly, sensibly' .....you will find yourself a country mile short.

Yes, immigrant demonising propaganda is morally corrupt. But we can't stop it but we can point out what it is to people and ask them to question what they see, do their own research and hopefully they can come to the conclusion themselves.

We can't talk to them if we call them names, close down discussions, behave in a superior manner. Nobody, quite correctly, should listen to a bully no matter if they have a valid point or not and last time I looked we don't live in an autocratic country.

You two remind me of Humpty Dumpty:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty Dumpty told everyone to get off in case they fall.

Not to mention Eeyore's lies:

 

[sodthisforfun]

You two remind me of Humpty Dumpty:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty Dumpty told everyone to get off in case they fall.

View attachment 147610

View attachment 147611
Not to mention Eeyore's lies:
View attachment 147612

Are you going back into your abusive mode now?

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Are you going back into your abusive mode now?

No, just illustrating your hypocrisy.

 

[Notch7]

Are you going back into your abusive mode now?

Its all he has

 

[Notch7]

No, just illustrating your hypocrisy.

No, you are merely highlighting your own hypocrisy old bean

 

[transam]

You two remind me of Humpty Dumpty:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty Dumpty told everyone to get off in case they fall.

View attachment 147610

View attachment 147611
Not to mention Eeyore's lies:
View attachment 147612

what's all this about then R Bee > can u not condense yer posts a bit Hmmmm

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

No, you are merely highlighting your own hypocrisy old bean

I think it is totally impossible to be hypocritical by illustrating someone else's hypocrisy.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Its all he has

Perhaps I should refer to you and mighytgob as Humpty and Dumpty.
Eeyore and mightygob is old hat and well-worn whereas Humpty and Dumpty is indicative of your undivided loyalty to each other, your hypocrisy of accusing others of being abusive, and the broken state of your arguments and allegations.

Humpty and Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty and Dumpty told everyone else to get off in case they fall.

Now which one is Humpty and which one is Dumpty.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

what's all this about then R Bee > can u not condense yer posts a bit Hmmmm

Can you not understand it?
I will dumb it down a bit so you can understand it.
It is an illustration of Humpty being abusive to me (I can post many more illustrations of Humpty being abusive to Yafo, Ellal etc as well if you want), despite her accusations of me being abusive to her, when she is feigning her innocence. Hence my allegation of her hypocrisy.
It is also an illustration of Dumpty's lies, indicating his willingness to spread malicious smears, make false allegations (which he knows to be false) despite his allegations of me being abusive to him and him also feigning innocence. Again, I can post many more illustrations of his abuse to me, Yafo, Ellal, etc if you want. Hence, again, my allegation of Dumpty's hypocrisy.

Do you understand now?

I expect Humpty and Dumpty will be along any minute to accuse me of being abusive, when I am just being sarcastic.