Terrorist attack in London

[Himaginn]

So you agreed with Gerry when he said he could clearly hear alluha akbar being shouted?
I see you couldn't restrain yourself from four-letter expletives for long.

Is there any point soon that you're going to actually read what I wrote, stop being so stupid and quit inventing what I said?

Did you agree with Gerry when he said he could clearly hear etc...
or did you agree with my sentiments questioning his hearing?
Simple question, don't duck the issue.

I really can't believe how ****ing thick you are! Did I write that I agreed to either point of view? It's not ducking the issue, it's just you not reading and being so thick!
NO to agreeing with you
NO to agreeing with Gerry.
Do I have to have agreed with either of you to point out your patronising post? NO is the answer to that too.
Stop making stuff up. Weirdo.

Did you hear alluha akbar being shouted on the video?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Perhaps there was someone in the background advertising Alan's Snackbar.
(Thanks to Whitespirit for this joke)

 

[blightymam]

Did you hear alluha akbar being shouted on the video?

I didn't listen to it.
Oh, your apology for getting things wrong has been accepted Himmy. Chortle.

 

[blightymam]

Perhaps there was someone in the background advertising Alan's Snackbar.
(Thanks to Whitespirit for this joke)

Funny!!

 

[blightymam]

I am rude to you to highlight the fact that you are rude to others and you hate it done to you.

So let's get this straight, if I think someone is being racist, and I accuse them of being racist, you're going to be rude to me, irrespective of whether they were racist or not.
Does that about sum up your reason for your continual abusive four-letter expletives?

Nope.
But it's what you deserve.
When you treat people with respect, take on board their points and stop belittling them in your patronising manner, then I may stop. No promises tho because you're a cock.

So at what point do you think it's OK for me to accuse someone of racism?
At what point will you not be abusive if I accuse someone of racism?

Never. Not if you want to have a discussion about it. As I've written before many times, as soon as you start accusing people of racism you lose. They will put a wall up (understandably) and not listen to any reasonable thoughts you may have had. I am so sorry that you find this so very hard to understand, you cannot change views that way. As you have previously said that it's your own personal campaign to change views then it seems counterproductive to alienate them the way you do.

 

[Himaginn]

Did you hear alluha akbar being shouted on the video?

I didn't listen to it.
Oh, your apology for getting things wrong has been accepted Himmy. Chortle.

So you saw fit to jump to Gerry's defence, despite not knowing he was intentionally misrepresenting the news story to increase racial tension and incite racial violence.
You still saw fit to jump to his defence without appreciating whether he deserved derision or not.
I think you are a hypocritical liar.
It's become patently obvious that you will be abusive to me irrespective of the validity of my arguments.
You've proved it because you were abusive to me without understanding the validity of my argument. To you, the validity of my argument was immaterial.
The typical four-letter expletives, the continual use of abusive insults and the fallibility of your reasoning demonstrates your true allegiance.

 

[Foxtrot Oscar]

Did you hear alluha akbar being shouted on the video?

I didn't listen to it.
Oh, your apology for getting things wrong has been accepted Himmy. Chortle.

So you saw fit to jump to Gerry's defence, despite not knowing he was intentionally misrepresenting the news story to increase racial tension and incite racial violence.
You still saw fit to jump to his defence without appreciating whether he deserved derision or not.
I think you are a hypocritical liar.
It's become patently obvious that you will be abusive to me irrespective of the validity of my arguments.
You've proved it because you were abusive to me without understanding the validity of my argument. To you, the validity of my argument was immaterial.
The typical four-letter expletives, the continual use of abusive insults and the fallibility of your reasoning demonstrates your true allegiance.

Get the Kleenex out Himaginn, you are really getting over exited... Don't get it all over your keyboard.

 

[Himaginn]

So at what point do you think it's OK for me to accuse someone of racism?
At what point will you not be abusive if I accuse someone of racism?

Never. Not if you want to have a discussion about it. As I've written before many times, as soon as you start accusing people of racism you lose. They will put a wall up (understandably) and not listen to any reasonable thoughts you may have had. I am so sorry that you find this so very hard to understand, you cannot change views that way. As you have previously said that it's your own personal campaign to change views then it seems counterproductive to alienate them the way you do.

So if I accuse someone of racism, even if it's deserved, you'll still be abusive to me?
You're true allegiance is now evident.
Perhaps you'll retract your response below, and the comment that you dislike racism. Because evidently, you dislike someone being called a racist, even if it's deserved, far more than you dislike racism itself.

Nope.
But it's what you deserve.

 

[blightymam]

Did you hear alluha akbar being shouted on the video?

I didn't listen to it.
Oh, your apology for getting things wrong has been accepted Himmy. Chortle.

So you saw fit to jump to Gerry's defence, despite not knowing he was intentionally misrepresenting the news story to increase racial tension and incite racial violence.
You still saw fit to jump to his defence without appreciating whether he deserved derision or not.
I think you are a hypocritical liar.
It's become patently obvious that you will be abusive to me irrespective of the validity of my arguments.
You've proved it because you were abusive to me without understanding the validity of my argument. To you, the validity of my argument was immaterial.
The typical four-letter expletives, the continual use of abusive insults and the fallibility of your reasoning demonstrates your true allegiance.

AGAIN, I will say it AGAIN, I highlighted the way you spoke to someone when you hate being spoke to like that. CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT? The discussion wasn't a part of it! FFS!

 

[blightymam]

Never. Not if you want to have a discussion about it. As I've written before many times, as soon as you start accusing people of racism you lose. They will put a wall up (understandably) and not listen to any reasonable thoughts you may have had. I am so sorry that you find this so very hard to understand, you cannot change views that way. As you have previously said that it's your own personal campaign to change views then it seems counterproductive to alienate them the way you do.

So if I accuse someone of racism, even if it's deserved, you'll still be abusive to me?
You're true allegiance is now evident.
Perhaps you'll retract your response below, and the comment that you dislike racism. Because evidently, you dislike someone being called a racist, even if it's deserved, far more than you dislike racism itself.

Nope.
But it's what you deserve.

Bullshit. Making stuff up again.

 

[noseall]

Hey fatboy, i'll bet £100 he turns out to be a muslim or muslim sympathiser.

Highly likely as he is of Somali decent. Does that justify entitling the thread "Terrorist attack in London"?

 

[Himaginn]

AGAIN, I will say it AGAIN, I highlighted the way you spoke to someone when you hate being spoke to like that. CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT? The discussion wasn't a part of it! FFS!

But you defended someone, for misrepresenting a news report in order to increase racial tension, without understanding the arguments.
It was simply in opposition to me. Plain and simple, but it meant that you, perhaps inadvertently, defended someone who was being racist.
You did not understand the arguments but you criticised me for arguing against the misrepresentation of news reports.

You behaved like a typical racist. You jumped to the defence of a racist action.

 

[sooey]

Hey fatboy, i'll bet £100 he turns out to be a muslim or muslim sympathiser.

Highly likely as he is of Somali decent. Does that justify entitling the thread "Terrorist attack in London"?

So you don't think the people he attacked were terrified dhead? Including the poor woman he killed. Of course it was a terrorist attack you fool.

 

[ajstoneservices]

Some fooking rascist turned to my wife at 7am saying "I bet you any money he turns out to be a murderus Somali scumbag" I get home this evening to hear he was just that.

 

[blightymam]

AGAIN, I will say it AGAIN, I highlighted the way you spoke to someone when you hate being spoke to like that. CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT? The discussion wasn't a part of it! FFS!

But you defended someone, for misrepresenting a news report in order to increase racial tension, without understanding the arguments.
It was simply in opposition to me. Plain and simple, but it meant that you, perhaps inadvertently, defended someone who was being racist.
You did not understand the arguments but you criticised me for arguing against the misrepresentation of news reports.

You behaved like a typical racist. You jumped to the defence of a racist action.

Oh, we are back to the racist calling again! YAY! Change the record why don't you? There's no racist comment from me and you know it.
Yes I attacked you for your name calling, nothing else. And I will do it again and again until you stop it. Treat people with respect and I will treat you with respect.
I did not defend anyone, why you find this so so very hard to understand is beyond me. I suggest you go read and re-read until the penny finally drops. Until then, please refrain from telling me what my post meant when I was the person who wrote it and know exactly what I meant by it.
Prick.