The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #156666   Message #3700958
Posted By: Teribus
10-Apr-15 - 04:33 AM
Thread Name: BS: BBC v. Jeremy Clarkson.
Subject: RE: BS: BBC v. Jeremy Clarkson.
"On a recent thread about historians you used the term "you lose" over 45 times to my knowledge (I was bored one day and counted them)

You repeat constantly, you lie constantly, you are deceitful and two faced to say nothing of your limited intelligence. It is tedious, boring and serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever as no-one takes you seriously in the first place." - Raggytash


1: "Your repeat constantly"

And? The one thing about the truth and the one thing about facts is they rarely, if ever, alter and on such occasions that they do it is usually due to new information coming to light. Facts supported by the fullest and latest information tend to be constant and verifiable, unlike some of the assertions made by the likes of yourself, Dave the Gnome, the Musktwats, Steve Shaw and Jim Carroll on that self same thread "about historians"

2: "you lie constantly"

Really?? Only in your fevered imagination, but there again perhaps you could provide some examples of these lies then we could compare them with the ones told by the likes of yourself, Dave the Gnome, the Musktwats, Steve Shaw and Jim Carroll on that self same thread "about historians"

3: "deceitful

Where? when? C'mon Raggy you've made the observation and felt compelled to comment so now substantiate it - or have the decency to STFU.

4: "and two faced to say nothing of your limited intelligence"

Well from what I have seen on this Forum you appear to condemn people you see on one side of the argument for faults that you let pass when exhibited by those you regard as supporting your views - that Raggy ol'son is being two faced. As to the "lack of intelligence" jibe - well in that particular thread Keith ran circles round all of you, purely because his knowledge of the events was based on a balance of what historians of the time and of those down throughout the century that has passed have written about it - unlike those arguing against it who relied on the out of date and discredited writings of those with a particular axe to grind, a few poets, left-wing luvvies with their own unconnected agenda and comedy script writers.

5: As to Keith A's contributions on that particular thread being - "tedious, boring and serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever" - well they would be to you wouldn't they, his views first challenged, then completely blew apart all those myths and smug assumptions your lazy approach to the topic held dear, and instead of being open to debate and actually learning something you preferred to wallow in ignorance - the purpose by the way was to inform and to go some way towards righting a tremendous wrong that had been done to people who could not defend themselves.

6: "as no-one takes you seriously in the first place."

If that is true Raggy then more fool you.