Donate SIGN UP

Fed Up With The Usual Hype Fed To Us By Our Media? Then Here Is A Piece That Tells It Exactly How It Is.

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 14:14 Mon 05th Jun 2017 | News
120 Answers
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4571882/We-war-writes-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN.html

/// 'They have encouraged the pernicious doctrine of 'multiculturalism' — which is just a fancy word for apartheid and has created vast, monocultural Muslim ghettoes in our great cities . . . ///

/// 'The politicians have opened the floodgates to mass immigration without insisting on integration. They pretend that every culture, no matter how medieval and barbaric, is worthy of equal respect. ///


Gravatar

Answers

81 to 100 of 120rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
Question Author
AB Editor

/// You lot must thing I don't do anything round here. ///

Not me Gov, suck,suck :0)

But why did you choose to alter AH's post but chose to remove mine?
AOG - // Show me where I have gone wrong and if I have then I apologise and run away with my tail between my legs. //

Once again you have either failed to read, or ignored my post today when yet again for the umpteenth time, I advised you that I do not deal with posts which attack me personally – Moderators are not permitted to take personal action in that way.

So now the Editor has confirmed that it was he, not I who edited the posts – I do not have the facilty to edit posts, no Moderator does, just the editorial team.

I am not fussed whether or not you run anywhere, or where you place your tail, but I look forward to your apology, which as a gentleman, I am sure will be happy to print with the same eagerness with which you make your personal attacks.

Thank you.

I think it's absolutely wrong for ANYONE to edit posts. If, for some reason, what's written contravenes 'the rules', they should be removed, not edited to suit.
Naomi - I suggest you mail that viewpoint to the Editor, since it is in his remit, and his only, to edit posts.

You may get a response along the lines of 'My gaff, my rules ...' but that is clearly the person to whom your post should be addressed.
The whole darn thread is a washout.
andy-hughes, when I want your advice I'll ask for it. I'd rather give my opinion openly and honestly so that everyone can see it - if it's all the same to you. Thank you.
Naomi - //andy-hughes, when I want your advice I'll ask for it. //

Then I am sure you will be delighted to practice what you preach.

// I'd rather give my opinion openly and honestly so that everyone can see it - if it's all the same to you. //

Never an argument from me on that score.

// Thank you. //

You are most welcome, as always.
andy-hughes, I've already stepped out of discussion with you once today. I'm not getting into this silliness with you.
Posts can get edited??????
Blimey, that's a new one on me on this site!
And I thought that Theresa May was on dangerous ground with her talk of regulating the internet....
By an Editor, yes.
-- answer removed --
// Posts can get edited?????? //

Nigh can be a first amendment absolutist (my new phrase) and stands or falls by her statements at least when she is talking

but I think the sense of the thread ( er yes I really did write that) is better served if some answers are edited rather than zapped

otherwise you get answer removed/ answer remived - and think
blimey what was that about ? anything good ?

and so it was the great Fred Puli's contribution was removed on half way pleading ( galbraith plea - your honour the crown's case is no good can you dismiss and we can all go home early for tea) - which was kinduva pity because Fred P was a ( now deceased ) criminal QC
Wish someone would edit your posts PP, maybe make them readable :)
I see AH decided to join in with AOG in debating after all. How interesting.
Zacs - // I see AH decided to join in with AOG in debating after all. How interesting. //

Not quite.

AOG decided not to engage with me – his choice, however, I never stopped engaging with him, replying to his posts regularly, although not receiving a response.

Today, he decided to address me directly, but having fielded a personal insult aimed at me today, I declined to pursue a dialogue, and that is where we stand.

Speaking personally, I shall continue to address posts to AOG as and when I feel they require a response, obviously I cannot confirm if he will do the same.
'I am not minded to debate with you either'

???
Zacs - // 'I am not minded to debate with you either'

??? //

It just means I don't wish to debate with you - nothing more than that.
You posted that to AOG, Andy, not me. But then you continued to debate with him. See the contradiction?
Zacs - // You posted that to AOG, Andy, not me. But then you continued to debate with him. See the contradiction? //

If you are referring to my post expecting an apology, that's not 'debating', that's expecting an apology!

I don't think we need to pursue this any further - do you?
Zacs - //You posted that to AOG, Andy, not me. //

Apologies for the confusion - I was merely clarifying what I meant, I was not addressing the remark in your direction.

81 to 100 of 120rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Fed Up With The Usual Hype Fed To Us By Our Media? Then Here Is A Piece That Tells It Exactly How It Is.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.