Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

what does emily benn tell us about the state of politics

It is ironic that when you write people off even on this thread as sheeple, so you do not have to respond to what is being said.

eople believe whatever they are told, especially if told so by authority figures, without processing it to be sure that it is an accurate representation of the real world around them.
 
Ok. Here i listed a number of anti-semitic actions/positions staements from David Icke, including his use of the protocosls of the elders of zion. You responded to this by explictly saying this (and the other things listed) were not anti-semitic - here

I argued it was debatable, which of course it is, like all things are.
 
No, you said that it definitively wasn't, not that it might not be. It there in black and white in that link. You said in response to another posters saying "i dont' think any of that is exactly antisemitism. mental it might be, but not antisemitic"

Nor do I!

Now, if you've changed your mind since that thread then that's a good thing. But there's clearly some considerable distance to travel yet if you genuinely believe that it's 'debatable' as to whether the protocols of the elders of zion is anti-semitic or not.

Why all these small lies?
 
No, you said that it definitively wasn't, not that it might not be. It there in black and white in that link. You said in response to another posters saying "i dont' think any of that is exactly antisemitism. mental it might be, but not antisemitic"



Now, if you've changed your mind since that thread then that's a good thing. But there's clearly some considerable distance to travel yet if you genuinely believe that it's 'debatable' as to whether the protocols of the elders of zion is anti-semitic or not.

Why all these small lies?

Not exactly anti-semetic I agreed with, its all about intention you see, stop fibbing.

To be fair I am not really very interested in this zion crap nor do i agree with it, it is clearly bollocks.

What this has to with my view that left politics is dead, I have no idea!
 
No, you agreed that it wasn't anti-semitic ('i dont' think any of that is exactly antisemitism.'), that bit you agreed with -that's why you removed ther rest of the quote you were agreeing with. Never mind, i don't expect you to admit even though it's there in B&W, but others can click the linsk and see for themselves.

This still leaves you thinking that it's 'debatable' as to whether the protocols are anti-semitic. That's a pretty ignorant position to take in all honesty, there's no shaes of grey on this issue. (I fully expcet you'll deny saying even this in a few minutes)
 
No, you agreed that it wasn't anti-semitic ('i dont' think any of that is exactly antisemitism.'), that bit you agreed with -that's why you removed ther rest of the quote you were agreeing with. Never mind, i don't expect you to admit even though it's there in B&W, but others can click the linsk and see for themselves.

This still leaves you thinking that it's 'debatable' as to whether the protocols are anti-semitic. That's a pretty ignorant position to take in all honesty, there's no shaes of grey on this issue. (I fully expcet you'll deny saying even this in a few minutes)

Its not ignorant at all, you live in a land of black and white that is the problem with you not me. There are shades of grey here.

Free the sheeps eh!
 
Its up to you to prove a positive not me prove a negative.

What exactly is anti-semetic about it?

You said there were shades of grey, tell me what they are. It's plain that you don't know the first thing about them - if you did you wouldn't say something so daft. (I did inlcude a link above to help you, but you evidently didn't bother even briefly loking at it or doing the most basic of research). As it stands there a great big question mark hanging over your head, as there is anyone who thinks it's 'debatable' if the protocols were/are anti-semitic.

A forged document designed explicitly to whip up anti-semitism during a time of widespread pogroms, rampant black hundreds and naked anti-semitism throughout eastern and central europe. A document that claims that the jews are behind every bad thing over the last 1000 years, that accuses themk of countless heinous crimes and claims that they're still manouvering to put their evil plans into operation. A forgery that formed the central core of the anti-jewish beliefs of the leading circles of the NSDAP and neo-nazis ever since. You think there's some 'shades of grey' abpuit this? That it's anti-semitic intent and effect is 'debatable'?

Ok, there's why it's anti-semitic. Let's see you argue why there are shades of grey in it and where it's anti-semitic nature is 'debatable'. Not that you will, you'll just post another content free teenage-nietzschean whinge (though it's clear you don't actually understand Nietzsche beyond some bowlderised sheeple nonsense - another forgery taken up by the NSDAP as well, lots of links here aren't there)

The new confused you is really swimming in the filth.
 
You said there were shades of grey, tell me what they are. It's plain that you don't know the first thing about them - if you did you wouldn't say something so daft. (I did inlcude a link above to help you, but you evidently didn't bother even briefly loking at it or doing the most basic of research). As it stands there a great big question mark hanging over your head, as there is anyone who thinks it's 'debatable' if the protocols were/are anti-semitic.

A forged document designed explicitly to whip up anti-semitism during a time of widespread pogroms, rampant black hundreds and naked anti-semitism throughout eastern and central europe. A document that claims that the jews are behind every bad thing over the last 1000 years, that accuses themk of countless heinous crimes and claims that they're still manouvering to put their evil plans into operation. A forgery that formed the central core of the anti-jewish beliefs of the leading circles of the NSDAP and neo-nazis ever since. You think there's some 'shades of grey' abpuit this? That it's anti-semitic intent and effect is 'debatable'?

Ok, there's why it's anti-semitic. Let's see you argue why there are shades of grey in it and where it's anti-semitic nature is 'debatable'. Not that you will, you'll just post another content free teenage-nietzschean whinge (though it's clear you don't actually understand Nietzsche beyond some bowlderised sheeple nonsense - another forgery taken up by the NSDAP as well, lots of links here aren't there)

The new confused you is really swimming in the filth.

You are getting aggressive again, have you been drinking?

P.s - I love the way you are telling me what i know and don't know. You know fuck all about me. You are funny.

Saying some Jewish people have done bad things is not anti-semetic.
 
It takes someone actually saying something for there to be real disagreement. You're not saying anything. You just running. Fair enough. If that's what you need to do.
 
It takes someone actually saying something for there to be real disagreement. You're not saying anything. You just running. Fair enough. If that's what you need to do.

I have been pretty clear, I have no idea what you are saying though. I run from no one. Especially not bullies.
 
Back
Top Bottom