Bnp win Euro seat.

[looney]

Treacharey [sic] is, surely, exstreme [sic] partizanship against their country, using your definition? Personally, I'd say the opposite of extreme partizanship is.... absolutely no partizanship, which isn't treachery at all?

Another twist of logic.

Its not a comparison between partisanship and none at all. its a comparison of for/pro/nationalism with against/anti/trechery. Indifference would be in the centre,if at all, which isn't the opposite.

 

[looney]

Are you drunk?

No are you?

 

[Juan Albion]

Now you are using a straw man argument. Trechery is not neccasarily criminal, treason is.

What's criminal is your lack of mastery of your native tongue.

 

[DTES]

Now you are using a straw man argument. Trechery is not neccasarily criminal, treason is.

Have you got a global citizens passport? Mine says British on it.

Ironically, you've countered the "straw man", by replacing it with another political/legal comparison. Nationalism is a political belief, your passport is issued legally independent of your politics. I'm afraid there's just as much straw involved here...

 

[Juan Albion]

Looney is a good example why extemists (left or right) are so dangerous - have different views to their so-called narrow definition of 'nationalism' and they will call it treachery and send you off to a camp somewhere.

 

[Nottseagull]

Trechery

Have a third try.

 

[looney]

Ironically, you've countered the "straw man", by replacing it with another political/legal comparison. Nationalism is a political belief, your passport is issued legally independent of your politics. I'm afraid there's just as much straw involved here...

Now you are doing something called QUOTING OUT OF CONTEXT.

The first and second sentences were replies to Juans first and second sentances respectavley and were not posted to be jelled together in a fatuos argument.

 

[Brian Fantana]

The BNP have won one seat. Great. They are going to represent a serious threat to amy of the main parties at a general election. Let's not give them the publicity that they thrive on.

 

[looney]

What's criminal is your lack of mastery of your native tongue.

Now you have begun sobbing I know youve exausted any arguments and maybe its time you went to bed or crawled back under your rock. whichever is more realistic for your species, I cant tell.

 

[Juan Albion]

Now you are doing something called QUOTING OUT OF CONTEXT.

The first and second sentences were replies to Juans first and second sentances respectavley and were not posted to be jelled together in a fatuos argument.

Looney, it's not surprising people have trouble with your answers. You are a miasma of nit-picking and semantics. No real substance.

 

[looney]

Looney is a good example why extemists (left or right) are so dangerous - have different views to their so-called narrow definition of 'nationalism' and they will call it treachery and send you off to a camp somewhere.

Wow your covering every base in empty arguements.

What you are doing now is called PROJECTING. tHIS IS WHERE YOU PROJECT BELEIFS ONTO ANOTHER PERSON IN AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT, RATHER THAN DEBATE RATIONALLY..

I was expessing two exstemes, the left and far right. You are not smart enough to see where I am politically.

 

[Nottseagull]

(to Looney)

What's criminal is your lack of mastery of your native tongue.

Looney is a good example why extemists (left or right) are so dangerous -

 

[Juan Albion]

Now you have begun sobbing I know youve exausted any arguments and maybe its time you went to bed or crawled back under your rock. whichever is more realistic for your species, I cant tell.

No, you are going on about wanting to preserve your national identity. I merely find it amusing that you are so poor at one of the basic elements of that identity.

 

[looney]

Looney, it's not surprising people have trouble with your answers. You are a miasma of nit-picking and semantics. No real substance.

Ah now you move on to CHEAP RHETORIC AND AVOIDANCE.

This is where you start abstracting points without explaining and avoiding the rational debate by claiming its an argument about semantics.

Easily dealt with.

Please explain what I am nit picking and what exactly is twisting semantics?

 

[Juan Albion]

Wow your covering every base in empty arguements.

What you are doing now is called PROJECTING. tHIS IS WHERE YOU PROJECT BELEIFS ONTO ANOTHER PERSON IN AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT, RATHER THAN DEBATE RATIONALLY..

I was expessing two exstemes, the left and far right. You are not smart enough to see where I am politically.

Did I not just say that the two extremes are equally dangerous?

 

[defrocked priest]

[yt]teMlv3ripSM[/yt]





JA: Is so.
L: Is not
Ja: Is so
L: Is not

and so it goes.

 

[looney]

No, you are going on about wanting to preserve your national identity. I merely find it amusing that you are so poor at one of the basic elements of that identity.

I have dyslexia and you are an idiot.

I could use spellchecker but seeing there isn't a brainchecker your f***ed.

 

[Juan Albion]

Ah now you move on to CHEAP RHETORIC AND AVOIDANCE.

This is where you start abstracting points without explaining and avoiding the rational debate by claiming its an argument about semantics.

Easily dealt with.

Please explain what I am nit picking and what exactly is twisting semantics?

Nit-picking and semantics: e.g. your differentiation between treachery and treason.

You were right, it was easily dealt with.

 

[Juan Albion]

I have dyslexia and you are an idiot.

I could use spellchecker but seeing there isn't a brainchecker your f***ed.

I'm afraid that is no excuse these days. Whether you are an idiot or not, in a written debate you certainly look like an idiot.

 

[Nottseagull]

I have dyslexia and you are an idiot.

I could use spellchecker but seeing there isn't a brainchecker your f***ed.

Huge guffaw in Mansfield! Sorry Juan, but that was brilliant!