nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:No, just pointing out that you were about to do it again. You did.
Oh, how original of you. Quelle surprise. Even your insults are looking a little jaded.
Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?
- Thread starter nino_savatte
- Start date
Oh, how original of you. Quelle surprise. Even your insults are looking a little jaded.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
Still lecturing me on debating skills, dimwit?
You come across as shallow, snide, nitpicking and defensive. So we're even.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
You're talking out of your arse again, friend. This isn't a poker game and you aren't playing poker. You're trying to apply one set of principles to something that doesn't have use for them.
Nice try. What else have you got?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
You're not even making sense now. Do you read what you've typed before you press "send"?
nino_savatte said:
That's a strange way to spell 'submit'.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
You're either paranoid or you're completely delusional. I'm not doing this to get "even with you". How juvenile.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
Fuck me, this is getting desperate. It's like watching an alcoholic trying to squeeze the last drops out of a can of Tennent's Super.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
I see you've now adopted a new line..."getting even". You're truly pathetic. Even my 4 year auld grandson wouldn't come out with shite like that.
Let's see, "simplistic anti-nationalism" didn't work and neither did "political novice"...I know, I'll accuse him of trying to "get even", that's bound to work. Nope, sorry, it just makes you look like a tit.
Come on, let's see some more of your other juvenile comebacks.
I'm surprised that you haven't used the auld "You don't like me" routine yet.
nino_savatte said:I see you've now adopted a new line..."getting even". You're truly pathetic. Even my 4 year auld grandson wouldn't come out with shite like that.
Let's see, "simplistic anti-nationalism" didn't work and neither did "political novice"...I know, I'll accuse him of trying to "get even", that's bound to work. Nope, sorry, it just makes you look like a tit.
Come on, let's see some more of your other juvenile comebacks.
I'm surprised that you haven't used the auld "You don't like me" routine yet.
What was the point of that, then? Again, stop showing me your cards. I now know that "simplistics anti-nationalism", "political novice" and "trying to get even" all sting. Stop giving me unfair advantage, I'm not going to learn anything by winning arguments.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Knotted said:
Baillement.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I've put you on ignore, beckyp, because you're a complete and utter waste of time. You contribute nothing to these threads and only turn up to give your pals support with a few silly comments and poor attempts at comic put downs. If you had a brain, you'd be dangerous.
And that's the way it's going to stay.
And that's the way it's going to stay.
Originally Posted by durruti02
1) indeed they appear to have been ..'taking control' though remains a must read for any trade unionactivist even if much f it seems very 8ts
2) 'ultra left' / 'workers militia' .. MC what the fuck are you on mate! .. link me to the workers milita bit on the iwca website please!
3) you have regularly raised race in these debates ..
4) bureaucracy??? sorry but you are confused .. the beaucracy is AGAINST wokers control mate .. not sure how you have get this so wrong
1) why??? funny attitude! you are a trade unionist. if you recommeded me a book i would say ' ok i'll have a look' i have been a shoppie of and on ( currently on ) for 20 years .. and i will repeat there is much in it we should still be aiming for now
2) that we need a stratgey that starts from the base, and that we need to bring people together and aim to get little victories. i think WCCIWCAs is good as a 'slogan' in this and sums up well. so much left politics is issue based. this is saying we need to CONSOLIDATE success, whether thru what respect are doing in preston or iwca in oxford, or in work in TRAs etc .. and p.s. so where was the workers militia stuff!!
3) whatever .. i apologise if i have mixed you up .. i don't think i have but can't be bothered to trawl back .. so without qoutes i'll leave it as an apology
4)MC this really does confuse me how you think i am sayiing this! I have never ever argued anything of the sort. I have consistantly argued that the rank and file should enforce the closed shop NOT the bureaucracy ( that would be contradictory to everything i am arguing for).
And i have never argued that the state should impose restrictions. i believe that that immigration control is all about controlliing people ALL people, not about controlling the movement of labour, which again as i have always argued is controlled by demand.
mate i am arguing from a localist angle. i argue local union shops/ local Trade councils should be involved in campaigns to employ local youth, local unemployed .. to restrict employers NOT workers .. not bureaucracies etc .. to me this is part of creating sustainable strong w/c communiites capable of resistance .. WCIWCAs indeed!
1) indeed they appear to have been ..'taking control' though remains a must read for any trade unionactivist even if much f it seems very 8ts
2) 'ultra left' / 'workers militia' .. MC what the fuck are you on mate! .. link me to the workers milita bit on the iwca website please!
3) you have regularly raised race in these debates ..
4) bureaucracy??? sorry but you are confused .. the beaucracy is AGAINST wokers control mate .. not sure how you have get this so wrong
MC5 said:1) I'll pass thanks.
2) "Working Class Control in Working Class Areas" means what exactly then to you?
3) I have never in a million years thought about a post on a thread and decided that I was: "more interested in whether it is racist" or not? A complete, off the wall claim by yourself, as it implies now that you can read my mind.Scraping the barrel there chum.
4) Not confused at all.
1) why??? funny attitude! you are a trade unionist. if you recommeded me a book i would say ' ok i'll have a look' i have been a shoppie of and on ( currently on ) for 20 years .. and i will repeat there is much in it we should still be aiming for now
2) that we need a stratgey that starts from the base, and that we need to bring people together and aim to get little victories. i think WCCIWCAs is good as a 'slogan' in this and sums up well. so much left politics is issue based. this is saying we need to CONSOLIDATE success, whether thru what respect are doing in preston or iwca in oxford, or in work in TRAs etc .. and p.s. so where was the workers militia stuff!!
3) whatever .. i apologise if i have mixed you up .. i don't think i have but can't be bothered to trawl back .. so without qoutes i'll leave it as an apology
4)MC this really does confuse me how you think i am sayiing this! I have never ever argued anything of the sort. I have consistantly argued that the rank and file should enforce the closed shop NOT the bureaucracy ( that would be contradictory to everything i am arguing for).
And i have never argued that the state should impose restrictions. i believe that that immigration control is all about controlliing people ALL people, not about controlling the movement of labour, which again as i have always argued is controlled by demand.
mate i am arguing from a localist angle. i argue local union shops/ local Trade councils should be involved in campaigns to employ local youth, local unemployed .. to restrict employers NOT workers .. not bureaucracies etc .. to me this is part of creating sustainable strong w/c communiites capable of resistance .. WCIWCAs indeed!
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Because you have shown yourself to be an inveterate liar.
Now we’re getting somewhere. Are you in RA, durutti? We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite.
I take anything that the RA/IWCA says with a tonne of salt. In fact, I think that both organisations have some barking mad ideas
But then, its take on history is rather curious
It depends on what one means by “socialism”. If you’re talking about the USSR, then that isn’t socialism and if one is referring to the Labour Party, then that isn’t socialism either.
Personally speaking, I think some of the IWCA's policies resemble those of the right and there is a reason for this: to steal votes away from the BNP, NF et al, but it is a dangerous game and rather than tackle bigotry, it embraces it for political expediency
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:1) where .. put up or shut up
2) interesting what does this mean??? "We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite"
3) thanks for the lesson
4) nonsense .. how?
Christ, "put up or shut up", what? Wtf are you on about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nino_savatte
1)Because you have shown yourself to be an inveterate liar.
2) Now we’re getting somewhere. Are you in RA, durutti? We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite .I take anything that the RA/IWCA says with a tonne of salt. In fact, I think that both organisations have some barking mad ideas. But then, its take on history is rather curious
3)It depends on what one means by “socialism”. If you’re talking about the USSR, then that isn’t socialism and if one is referring to the Labour Party, then that isn’t socialism either.
4)Personally speaking, I think some of the IWCA's policies resemble those of the right and there is a reason for this: to steal votes away from the BNP, NF et al, but it is a dangerous game and rather than tackle bigotry, it embraces it for political expediency
durruti -
1) where?? .. put up or shut up
2) interesting!!!!! what does this mean??? "We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite"
3) thanks for the lesson
4) nonsense .. how?
Originally Posted by nino_savatte
1)Because you have shown yourself to be an inveterate liar.
2) Now we’re getting somewhere. Are you in RA, durutti? We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite .I take anything that the RA/IWCA says with a tonne of salt. In fact, I think that both organisations have some barking mad ideas. But then, its take on history is rather curious
3)It depends on what one means by “socialism”. If you’re talking about the USSR, then that isn’t socialism and if one is referring to the Labour Party, then that isn’t socialism either.
4)Personally speaking, I think some of the IWCA's policies resemble those of the right and there is a reason for this: to steal votes away from the BNP, NF et al, but it is a dangerous game and rather than tackle bigotry, it embraces it for political expediency
durruti -
1) where?? .. put up or shut up
2) interesting!!!!! what does this mean??? "We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite"
3) thanks for the lesson
4) nonsense .. how?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:
As usual, your post makes little sense becuase all you have done is badly cite one of my posts. If you think that by doing this you are going to magically prove yourself 'correct', you are sadly mistaken.
You must be pretty thick, if you don't understand what I mean vis a vis the RA...perhaps I sould have said "schismatic" instead of "sectarian". Indeed, if you are on the Left, you are living proof of how sectarianism undermines any serious challenge to the Right.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:what total bullshit!
you claim that when you said "We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite" you meant 'schismatic' ..
so you still have hard feelings for them leaving the swp in 1980!!!
I don't give a shit about RA or the SWP: they're as bad as each other. Trust you to reply with such simplicities. You presented the RA as some sort of ideologically pure organisation. They aren't, any more than the other sects are.
What i would like to know is why you lot hate opposition to your cracked ideas on immigration. Why do you feel the need to use statements like "It isn't racist to be concerned about immigration". I know why, you want to close down any discussion that does not conform to your 'argument'. it's intellectually dishonest and it is cowardly.
nino_savatte said:
you clearly DO give a shit about RA to say this .. and i do not present RA as anything .. i simply metionned them .. i was never a member, it is not my role to defend them and i do have criticisms though that have no place on this thread
BUT just what DID this mean then???
"We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite"
p.s. i have NO problem with opposition to my ideas .. there have been really good debates with e.g. rmp3 and occasionally MC and VP who all disagreed with my position .. you however do not want to debate and seem to believe i am bnp or similar and should be rubbished not debated ..
p.s. this is your thread .. not content .. just another attempt to rubbish
p.s. do yuo not think it odd to accuse me of trying to shut debate when it is you who is doing that and you who accuse me of starting too many debates
Similar threads
