Liverpool Echo Thursday November 14Th...
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
This
http://
I've been waiting for a more acceptable news media to cover this (BBC, SKY Guardian etc) but there seems little interest in it.
If 4 White people abduct disabled Clinton supporting black man and torture him and stream it live on Facebook it would be be viral in minutes ... wouldn't it?
I've been waiting for a more acceptable news media to cover this (BBC, SKY Guardian etc) but there seems little interest in it.
If 4 White people abduct disabled Clinton supporting black man and torture him and stream it live on Facebook it would be be viral in minutes ... wouldn't it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by -Talbot-. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Your OP premise was that if this crime was committed by white people, the response would have been viral news coverage.
I suggested that this was a moot point, and you insulted me, referring to my post as ‘drivel.
I suggested that giving these psychopaths the credence of political motivation was nonsense.
You then insulted me again - Jimmy Savile mug ... rather hear my internet friends view than yours …
I pointed out that you were angry because you were not getting the response you thought you should.
You then ridiculed my past OP – I have no idea why you think that poking fun at my OP increases the validity of yours.
Once again, I pointed out that you were attacking / ridiculing posters who did not agree with you (not that is posters, plural, I was not speaking personally.
You responded telling me to ‘give the attacking ridiculing nonsense’ a rest.
My points are very simple –why are you so angry that this thread is not unfolding as you clearly think it should – to whit – mirrored outrage at what has happened, and the agreement that if another imaginary scenario had happened, it would have been better reported?
And on a personal note - why do you feel the need to launch personal attacks at me virtually every time I post on any thread on any day?
I suggested that this was a moot point, and you insulted me, referring to my post as ‘drivel.
I suggested that giving these psychopaths the credence of political motivation was nonsense.
You then insulted me again - Jimmy Savile mug ... rather hear my internet friends view than yours …
I pointed out that you were angry because you were not getting the response you thought you should.
You then ridiculed my past OP – I have no idea why you think that poking fun at my OP increases the validity of yours.
Once again, I pointed out that you were attacking / ridiculing posters who did not agree with you (not that is posters, plural, I was not speaking personally.
You responded telling me to ‘give the attacking ridiculing nonsense’ a rest.
My points are very simple –why are you so angry that this thread is not unfolding as you clearly think it should – to whit – mirrored outrage at what has happened, and the agreement that if another imaginary scenario had happened, it would have been better reported?
And on a personal note - why do you feel the need to launch personal attacks at me virtually every time I post on any thread on any day?
Talbot - //What personal attacks??????? //
I am not going to waste my time cutting and pasting examples, and clutter your erratic thread with them - you know what you do, as do I, as do others on here.
Ifyou want to pretend you don't, then there is nothing more I can do, except to advise that each time you do so in future, I will report the appropriate post.
I am not going to waste my time cutting and pasting examples, and clutter your erratic thread with them - you know what you do, as do I, as do others on here.
Ifyou want to pretend you don't, then there is nothing more I can do, except to advise that each time you do so in future, I will report the appropriate post.
Naomi24 - //I think andy-hughes has said on these pages that he is the owner of a Jimmy Savile mug. Carry on being shocked. //
In the interest of clarification, during the innocent days when everyone thought Jimmy Savile was a harmless eccentric, I was a big fan of his, and I bought a mug with his picture on, which I used at work, and this was mentioned on here - several years ago.
I confirmed when it was mentioned after Savile's exposure, that I no longer used it - again a matter of years ago.
Talbot's reference was intended entirely to infer that I remain a fan of Savile, even in the light of his exposed activities, and it was nasty and unpleasant, and typical of the way he likes to attack people he doesn't like.
Unlike my colleagues, I did not find his reference shocking - merely in keeping with his unfounded nasty hostility towards me, which he likes to pretend does not exist.
In the interest of clarification, during the innocent days when everyone thought Jimmy Savile was a harmless eccentric, I was a big fan of his, and I bought a mug with his picture on, which I used at work, and this was mentioned on here - several years ago.
I confirmed when it was mentioned after Savile's exposure, that I no longer used it - again a matter of years ago.
Talbot's reference was intended entirely to infer that I remain a fan of Savile, even in the light of his exposed activities, and it was nasty and unpleasant, and typical of the way he likes to attack people he doesn't like.
Unlike my colleagues, I did not find his reference shocking - merely in keeping with his unfounded nasty hostility towards me, which he likes to pretend does not exist.
