Equality

  • Thread starter Thread starter facilities
  • Start date Start date
joinerjohn1 said:
You entirely sure about that DA? They see their own father indulging in some “ harmless” cyber bullying and might copy that behaviour. Do you check their Facebook, and Snapchat logs ?
Click to expand...

Yes. Sure, thanks.

How many times must I tell you there's a difference betwixt bullying and calling folk for what they are? When what they are is not very good.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
Yes. Sure, thanks.

How many times must I tell you there's a difference betwixt bullying and calling folk for what they are?
Click to expand...
I don't quite believe you just said that. I think that's a very poor attempt to justify your behaviour on here in the past few weeks/ months, simply because they don't agree with you.
 
Not having read all...the previous 20 pages....a saying that comes to mind is
' Never argue or discuss anything...or try to reason with ........a moron'
RS
 
Back to the Wifebeating :(

Jack enjoy your break in Belgium, I worked in Antwerp for about a year many years ago and had a wonderful time

I do not expect you to answer any of this until your return

DA thank you for your well intentioned advice in post 363 whereby If I modified the terms to a choice between my being a slapper or joker that would win favour with Jack, your attempt At mediation is admirable.

DA this was point 4 from your post 360

4) JoT - as I hoped and also expected - was not swayed by my post an iota, but stuck to his moral guns and made it clear he didn't agree with me. (I am proud. And not surprised; he is a fellow Remainer, after all, and therefore naturally imbued with honestly and integrity).

Don’t you get it? of course Jack stuck to his moral guns and didn’t agree with you, he couldn’t cos if he did in his world he would have been made to look foolish and gullible, and he finds that totally unacceptable,

You may have seen the latest response from Jack and the goalposts have been moved to the issue now being that of my dishonesty which is the cornerstone of any real person, it appears Jack is utterly disgusted at the thought of my dishonesty it almost looks like he would prefer I were indeed a bully and wifebeater.

Was I dishonest, well during a spoof or wind up telling porky pies pies is part of the game otherwise a windup/spoof becomes rather difficult.

I will put my opinion in here, and it is that Jack who looks like he has accepted that it was a wind up, finds it very difficult to admit he was hoodwinked and leave it at that, so he is looking for a way out and that seems to be attacking my honesty in a misguided attempt to save face

Here is a timeline of events, hopefully Jack will not come back with time wasting distractions of no relevance (somehow I doubt it)

Jack you asked me in post 340 “where any of the Brexiteers aware that it was a wind up my answer to you in post 344 was that when I put the original post on where slapping was mentioned no Brexiteers were involved, this I maintain is true

In your post 346 you say my post 344 was dishonest because in DA’s post 327 he admits he had been tipped off, around the time DA was tipped off 2 Brexiteers were also tipped off all within 2 hours of each other, and this was all after I penned the offending post 286

So my answer to you Jack in post 344 was truthful

You fully believed (or led us to believe) that other Brexiteers were involved from the outset of the wind up/conspiracy I consider I have now fully explained that they were not

I now believe I have fully explained the dishonesty issue I have been accused of, but unfortunately Jack I think that you will have difficulty walking away from this without having the last word in a misguided attempt to exonerate yourself and save face even though all the evidence has now been put before you

One more thing should there be some doubt about did he or didn’t he slap the wife, do you honestly believe I would come on here and mention it if the deed had really been done?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
joinerjohn1 said:
I don't quite believe you just said that. I think that's a very poor attempt to justify your behaviour on here in the past few weeks/ months, simply because they don't agree with you.
Click to expand...

Oh gawd! I don't need to justify anything!

You twit!
 
facilities said:
Back to the Wifebeating :(

Jack enjoy your break in Belgium, I worked in Antwerp for about a year many years ago and had a wonderful time

I do not expect you to answer any of this until your return

DA thank you for your well intentioned advice in post 363 whereby If I modified the terms to a choice between my being a slapper or joker that would win favour with Jack, your attempt At mediation is admirable. Why, thank you. I think.

DA this was point 4 from your post 360

4) JoT - as I hoped and also expected - was not swayed by my post an iota, but stuck to his moral guns and made it clear he didn't agree with me. (I am proud. And not surprised; he is a fellow Remainer, after all, and therefore naturally imbued with honestly and integrity).

Don’t you get it? of course Jack stuck to his moral guns and didn’t agree with you, he couldn’t cos if he did in his world he would have been made to look foolish and gullible, and he finds that totally unacceptable, Hmmm. On what basis can you make that judgement of yours? Precisely - none. I'm sticking with my interpretation - which I reckon is more likely - thank you very much.

You may have seen the latest response from Jack and the goalposts have been moved to the issue now being that of my dishonesty which is the cornerstone of any real person, it appears Jack is utterly disgusted at the thought of my dishonesty it almost looks like he would prefer I were indeed a bully and wifebeater. Don't be silly. 'Cos that is silly. Thank you.

Was I dishonest, well during a spoof or wind up telling porky pies pies is part of the game otherwise a windup/spoof becomes rather difficult. Dishonest? Technically, yes. So JoT was correct. Mitigating circumstances 'cos it wuz a wind-up? Yup. But that doesn't technically change the technicalities. Ta muchly.

I will put my opinion in here, and it is that Jack who looks like he has accepted that it was a wind up, finds it very difficult to admit he was hoodwinked and leave it at that, so he is looking for a way out and that seems to be attacking my honesty in a misguided attempt to save face I see nothing to indicate that JoT finds it hard to accept he was 'hoodwinked'; he knows he was (as was I) so it would be churlish of him to try and pretend otherwise (which he hasn't). I think he was just peeved at you making a 'joke' about a serious issue, to which he felt obliged to answer in a serious manner, and for you to then dismiss it all out of hand as a wind-up doesn't really do its seriousness enough justice. And, since you then primed yer mates (and me) to the fact that it was a wind-up - before they could answer with their own true opinions (I wonder what they would have been? Alas, we'll never know) - meant your wind-up probably wasn't offered in the true spirit of a bona-fide, level-playing field, wind-up - ie the famous give-and-take 'banter' to which some love to refer. It was, instead, very much one-way; more like a group of like-minded kids ganging round a couple of individuals. With yer mates sniggering like a typical bunch of hangers-on as befits all bullies (not that I think you are a bully...)

Here is a timeline of events, hopefully Jack will not come back with time wasting distractions of no relevance (somehow I doubt it)

Jack you asked me in post 340 “where any of the Brexiteers aware that it was a wind up my answer to you in post 344 was that when I put the original post on where slapping was mentioned no Brexiteers were involved, this I maintain is true Yup, I believe you. But - wow - how intentionally misleading?! Yup, lots.

In your post 346 you say my post 344 was dishonest because in DA’s post 327 he admits he had been tipped off, around the time DA was tipped off 2 Brexiteers were also tipped off all within 2 hours of each other, and this was all after I penned the offending post 286

So my answer to you Jack in post 344 was truthful (Cough) Which is why I noted your cunning wording very carefully...

You fully believed (or led us to believe) that other Brexiteers were involved from the outset of the wind up/conspiracy I consider I have now fully explained that they were not I get this, Facs - I'm sure JoT does too. Why am I very confident that they were tipped off very shortly afterwards? Because they didn't stomp in with their size 12 hob-nails and say some embarrassing s*** (check out my 'wee island' thread to have a gander at what the usual suspects actually do on here given a chance. Or, when they haven't even been given a chance. They can't help themselves, man. They just march in and say 'stuff'.) Careful you don't become part of that scurrilous bunch, Facs. :rolleyes:

I now believe I have fully explained the dishonesty issue I have been accused of, but unfortunately Jack I think that you will have difficulty walking away from this without having the last word in a misguided attempt to exonerate yourself and save face even though all the evidence has now been put before you Oops - sorry. My replies suggest otherwise.

One more thing should there be some doubt about did he or didn’t he slap the wife, do you honestly believe I would come on here and mention it if the deed had really been done?
A touch sanctimonious, if I may say so. Answer is, Facs, I dunno. Many on here have shown themselves to be racist. And jingoistic. And staggeringly ignorant. And even threateningly violent towards their own kin (Mr Ha). And lots more besides. Not saying you are any of these, but that is the truth. So now we - the readers - are meant to be selective in what we interpret as the sincerity of other poster's comments? Wow, that's quite a burden. By 'burden', I mean 'easy get-out'.
Click to expand...

'Click to expand' - if you wish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
joinerjohn1 said:
The words of a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

Och, too easy to reply in kind :rolleyes:.

(Instead, just imagine what I could say about you...)

A wee apology, tho' - my "I don't need to justify anything!" remark came across not quite as I intended. What I mean is, I don't believe anything I've said required - or requires - further justification.

I'm not trying to avoid being considered a 'bully' by you or anyone else (by now you should have a pretty good grasp of the little regard I hold any of your 'thoughts') by claiming my remarks were just me 'calling it as it is', only that my remarks were me calling it as it is, so take that in whatever way you wish. Ideally as badly as possible.

I said 'em. I meant 'em. They spoke the truth based on what the targets have presented as evidence of themselves on here. I don't call someone 'ignorant' for no reason. I don't call anyone's behaviour jingoistic, biased, dishonest, devious, slimy, conniving... you get the idea, unless they have given cause.

'Bully'! lol...
 
Devil's Advocate said:
I don't call someone 'ignorant' for no reason. I don't call anyone's behaviour jingoistic, biased, dishonest, devious, slimy, conniving... you get the idea, unless they have given cause.

'Bully'! lol...
Click to expand...

No, you call people ignorant, jingoistic, biased, dishonest, slimy and conniving simply because they disagree with you and they don't share the same viewpoint. Sadly, by doing so, you qualify for the label of all of the above insults, you are by definition all of the above and worse, yuck, I'd hate to be you.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
'Click to expand' - if you wish.
Click to expand...


DA I’m saddened by your response in defending Jack, can’t you see I’m trying to help the guy face up to his condition, it’s not healthy to back someone up who is in denial (I have to be careful here as I am not referring to Remoaners as a group although some may think I maybe)

You are probably aware that Denial is at best, a coping mechanism but in reality only postpones the need to deal with their condition, now I agree some people need more time than others to face the realities of a given situation, but I was hopeful that Jack would get there, he needs to seek out the counsel of wise, caring and supportive people who he can trust to help rebuild his self-esteem which has taken a battering of late and as I have said agreeing with his actions at this point is not helpful.

I realise you mean well but try to take a step back and let him answer for his actions as I said in my post I don’t expect an answer till after his Belgium break

Now the guys on this forum know he has dug an hole for himself and prior to his trip to Belgium was still digging, this is character building and he should have been left to it the hard way, but now with your response you have taken his shovel away and have given him a JCB to continue,

I realise you are his cyber mate but a good mate would help him confront his demons only then will he come out tother side as a well rounded member of the human race

I sincerely hope this helps you in future before you jump In with your size 12s
 
facilities said:
DA I’m saddened by your response in defending Jack, can’t you see I’m trying to help the guy face up to his condition, it’s not healthy to back someone up who is in denial (I have to be careful here as I am not referring to Remoaners as a group although some may think I maybe)

You are probably aware that Denial is at best, a coping mechanism but in reality only postpones the need to deal with their condition, now I agree some people need more time than others to face the realities of a given situation, but I was hopeful that Jack would get there, he needs to seek out the counsel of wise, caring and supportive people who he can trust to help rebuild his self-esteem which has taken a battering of late and as I have said agreeing with his actions at this point is not helpful.

I realise you mean well but try to take a step back and let him answer for his actions as I said in my post I don’t expect an answer till after his Belgium break

Now the guys on this forum know he has dug an hole for himself and prior to his trip to Belgium was still digging, this is character building and he should have been left to it the hard way, but now with your response you have taken his shovel away and have given him a JCB to continue,

I realise you are his cyber mate but a good mate would help him confront his demons only then will he come out tother side as a well rounded member of the human race

I sincerely hope this helps you in future before you jump In with your size 12s
Click to expand...


Well, that's you in the lurch if your catflap goes wrong.
 
Exactly DA, you call others, conniving, ignorant, biased, dishonest, slimey ( and worse) simply because their view differs from yours. You attempt to come across as an intellectual, but you fail, immediately you resort to the insults, some not even thinly veiled. You think your clever DA, but honestly, you come across as someone lacking the smallest measure of intellect or intelligence. You call anyone who disagrees with you views, mock them and put them down at every opportunity. Just keep it up DA,, just keep it up.
 
fillyboy said:
No, you call people ignorant, jingoistic, biased, dishonest, slimy and conniving simply because they disagree with you and they don't share the same viewpoint. Sadly, by doing so, you qualify for the label of all of the above insults, you are by definition all of the above and worse, yuck, I'd hate to be you.
Click to expand...

Did anyone hear a strange buzzing noise?
 
joinerjohn1 said:
Exactly DA, you call others, conniving, ignorant, biased, dishonest, slimey ( and worse) simply because their view differs from yours. You attempt to come across as an intellectual, but you fail, immediately you resort to the insults, some not even thinly veiled. You think your clever DA, but honestly, you come across as someone lacking the smallest measure of intellect or intelligence. You call anyone who disagrees with you views, mock them and put them down at every opportunity. Just keep it up DA,, just keep it up.
Click to expand...

I will I will.

thank you
 
facilities said:
DA I’m saddened by your response in defending Jack, can’t you see I’m trying to help the guy face up to his condition, it’s not healthy to back someone up who is in denial (I have to be careful here as I am not referring to Remoaners as a group although some may think I maybe)

You are probably aware that Denial is at best, a coping mechanism but in reality only postpones the need to deal with their condition, now I agree some people need more time than others to face the realities of a given situation, but I was hopeful that Jack would get there, he needs to seek out the counsel of wise, caring and supportive people who he can trust to help rebuild his self-esteem which has taken a battering of late and as I have said agreeing with his actions at this point is not helpful.

I realise you mean well but try to take a step back and let him answer for his actions as I said in my post I don’t expect an answer till after his Belgium break

Now the guys on this forum know he has dug an hole for himself and prior to his trip to Belgium was still digging, this is character building and he should have been left to it the hard way, but now with your response you have taken his shovel away and have given him a JCB to continue,

I realise you are his cyber mate but a good mate would help him confront his demons only then will he come out tother side as a well rounded member of the human race

I sincerely hope this helps you in future before you jump In with your size 12s
Click to expand...

I wasn't defending JoT - he doesn't need it.

I was giving my interpretation of the event, and answering what I see as your somewhat contrived & evasive response and 'justification' for it.

If it helps, I stand 100% by my orange reply to your post.

And you also probably have a good idea what I think of your utangs and their 'contributions'. (If it helps, it's a lot less than I think of you. But, I'm losing warmth...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top