Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
8 June, 2007 at 1:31 pm #272955
I think he/she meant that they didnt believe we were in anyway contributing to it as global warming is a term that has been pretty much twisted now to mean “mankind caused global warming”
Something that there isnt a scrap of science to support, and which ALL science actually quite clearly and categorically contradicts irrefuteably
CO2 is as integral to global warming as badgers in scotland were to the rise of the third riech and the nazi party in germany to put it into a scientific context
8 June, 2007 at 1:22 pm #272810why is ignorance assumed in this kind of thing anyway?
Isnt it more a case of monkey see what monkey do? Lets look at a parallel, if one person pisses in a flower bed but then calls the police when someone else does it we’d think they were just a bit of a divvy brained twonk
Yet blacks routinely use the word nigger but whinge like a stuck pig if anyone else uses it in the exact same content, intent and meaning claiming offence
Firstly that IS racism shown by blacks
Secondly its seeing offence purely because they can get away with doing so as there wasnt any offence there or any intended, so its a bit of hysterical paranoia at best and severe mental issues at worst
To claim a word has a different meaning when said by someone of a different skin colour IS racism however you dress it up, so either the context its said in is the only relevant factor or its equally good or bad no matter what colour of skin the person saying it has
Thats whats known as “equality” a word many use but very few seem to grasp the meaning of nowadays it seems
Infact just to show how nonsensical this left wing apologetic nonsense is, its ALSO claimed that using the word “coloured” is offensive, and yet there are loads of black people who prefer that term to being called black]
its moronically logic bereft to impose or dictate what an entire mass or race of people “like” as they will all have their own preferences which wont be universally identical
Also, in the case of “blackie wanna be’s”, the whities who act decidedly “coonish” in their demeanour, they iz wanting to be black innit, so they are simply mimiccing what the blacks do, what they say and how they say it because of their total and utter lack of any form of identity or personality of their own in many cases
So even that isnt offence, its mimicry, so if you dont want to be mimmiced then dont flaming well do what you dont want copied in the first place and that avoids people whinging later on and looking like hysterical over reactive hypocritical panty slime
No offence intended of course
8 June, 2007 at 1:03 pm #272808@slayer wrote:
@emmalush wrote:
@johnboy25 wrote:
I don’t condone it
You dont condone the freedom to speak, when what is said is not meant to intentionally offend, and doesn’t offend?
You’re so good Emma
Since when was it deemed that only those at whom offence was aimed were the ones who were offended.
Ever thought the offence may have been felt by tens of thousands of other people- it doesnt matter if the individual is offended.
That would be a reasonable point if we were talking about a scripted soap, but its reality TV, if people are going to be offended by what real people (very strange mentally challenged freaks admittedly tho in the case of BB) are likely to say then they know where the on off switch is
The word cunt is also offensive to tens of thousands of people, but they dont tend to be the sort of people who think they have some special princess status in society and should influence everyone else based on THEIR preferences so the word is used frequently and without whingey whiney folks with nothing better to do complaining about it
Someone COULD be offended at someone using the word “brit”, or at someone stating they are hetrosexual, infact someone somewhere is probably offended by every single thing everyone says
But there has to be a line where complainers are just told to either grow up or switch the telly over and watch something else
The more these whingy pathetic immature idiots are pandered to the more they do it and the more ridiculous their objections have become
8 June, 2007 at 8:42 am #270152Irony?
But I NEVER do the ironying, thats work for the ickle wimminsey folks innit? :lol:
8 June, 2007 at 8:39 am #272951Cant see what all the fuss is about then really :lol: :lol: :lol:
7 June, 2007 at 11:38 pm #270150Well maybe you should be out trying to make some then JB lol
At least now you wouldnt have to worry about paying maintenance for the lil beggars, you just take em on holiday to portugal, leave em somewhere for a while and “voila!!!!” post delivery abortion :lol:, and to make that even more attractive you get to be a celeb too
How cool?
6 June, 2007 at 6:55 pm #270135“It’s Witchhunters mentality thinking they had some part in it”
BM, no its not actually, “witch hunters mentality” would be ONLY thinking they had something to do with it at the complete exclusion of any other possibility which is as close minded an outlook as being incapable of accepting its “possible”
Not ruling it out isnt close minded, its the opposite actually when it sits alongside many other equal possibilities
Infact a witch hunters mentality is closer shown by people who would ONLY think its someone else and CANT be the parents at all even tho there is nothing at all that can rule them out of being a possible accomplice or even the perpetrators
Thinking it COULD be them OR it could be someone else is actually pretty much the total opposite of a witch hunters mentality really, unless youre talking about witch hunts where witches were given a fair trial and guilt or innocence wasnt decided before the trial of course, but they werent called witch hunts anyway
6 June, 2007 at 6:48 pm #270133“Do you think it would have been wise of them to take their remaining kids on this long journey?”
LOL
Youre kidding right? That was meant to be a joke?
We’re talking about the people who have already taken their kids from the UK to portugal here, and youre saying that going to with them Italy is in some way detrimental to their kids lol
Suppose they had flown to itally to begin with and THEN maddy had been snatched, would you be criticising them for taking the kids there to begin with then? if not then them taking the kids ISNT a bad thing
Infact the remaining kids being with their galivanting parents wherever they go is I reckon a good thing seeing as they have lost a sibling FFS
Dont you think they NEED their parents right about now to actually be acting like parents rather than abandoning them at the merest whiff of a photo opportunity?
I have lost any thought that their craving for media exposure is really about Maddy anymore, personally I think its their own intoxication with the fame and exposure
6 June, 2007 at 6:38 pm #270129“I saw her the other day in tears. Is that good enough for you lot?”
You did? What happened? Did they get told they might have to end their holiday and go home?
6 June, 2007 at 5:59 pm #270125Well you have the rather grown up option of just not reading them dont you?
Instead you prefer to opt for the 8 year olds approach of whinging about it like a little girl
Why is that? For someone who “isnt bothered” you seem to be “bothering” a hell of a lot about something you cant grasp but “arent bothered about” dont ya?
When sane peope arent bothered about something they just DONT bother
Posting “i cant be bothered” and other equally inane infantile dross IS actually showing botheration on several levels you know, its a self contradicting action
-
AuthorPosts