But if we decide to declare war, militarily, financially, or otherwise, on a former ally, someone should be thinking very carefully about what the other guy might be doing in the meantime. Treaties aren't usually one-sided.
It was absolutely necessary. I can tell from your spittle-flecked response that you are a loon and a liar, so no need to quote your ranting.
Learn how to post a reply to usenet and behave yourself. As it is you are acting like a spoiled child.
So, like I said, the first and greater part of the ad hominems come from TNP and yourself.
Go and play spaceman with a plastic bag.
That's another lie. You started the ad hominem. And your "argument" is that of a snot-faced child in a school playground. "Please Sir! He started it!"
Oh look there's that hypocrisy that characterises each one of your posts.
So that was started by TNP ...
So that was started by you ...
It's a simple statement of fact.
If it was a street fight, it would have weight in law in apportioning blame. If you don't like what you've started, don't start it - it really is that simple!
As I believe I've advised you before: "When you're in a hole, stop digging!"
Your own hypocrisy beggars belief.
No, it was started by you. You were the one who started with the ad hominem. TNPs comment was not directed at an individual, yours was. Yours was the first ad hominem in the thread and you were pulled up on it. You don't like that because you suffer from some bizarre delusion / massive chip on your shoulder.
[snip your fatuous hypocritical cant]
How do reach the bizarre conclusion that "they are green fuckwits." was not directed at several individuals collectively?
Ditto.
How do you reach the bizarre conclusion that criticism of a group is an attack on you? You do know what ad hominem argument is? Oh, no you don't
You didn't snip, bozo, so "ditto" is clearly another term you don't understand.
Add mathematics, science and engineering to the list of things you don't understand, based on your "green by dogma" outpourings here. Clearly to you belief is of more importance than objective evidence. Emotion clearly trumps analysis for you.
What a shame for you that the thinking greens, few in number, take an entirely different line to greenwash of the sort you have been punting here.
Well, he lays claim to a maths degree, in which case he ought to understand statistics. Of course unless he's been exposed to physics he won't have a clue about science and engineering.
Why should it have to be an attack on me personally?
It was an unwarranted attack using derogatory stereotypes, which if it had based on sex, race, or colour would actually have been illegal. Such attacks are typical of the The Natural Pillock, are thoroughly unhelpful to reasoned debate, and make an absolute mockery of his nym (hence my frequent paraphrasing of it as above):
I think it is reasonable and healthy that every now and then he receives back such unpleasantness as he is in the habit of constantly giving out.
I was using it to refer to your own 'fatuous, hypocritical cant'.
Seeing as I've previously given my qualifications (1st Class Hons BSc Maths & Computing) and former profession (IT Project Manager), and as we can't seem to deduce any recognisable relevant expertise or knowledge in your posts, what are YOUR qualifications, and what is YOUR day job?
As so often with such remarks, they reveal more about the limitations of thinking of the person making them than the person so described. What you don't realise is that by assuming such characteristics of others, you reveal that you are aware that they are your own.
Give an example, if you can, of my so-called 'greenwash' - if it was found to be wrong, and I haven't said so, I'd be keen to put the record straight; if it was found to be correct, I'd be keen to clarify it.
Hmmm, I don't see any physics training there.
Or electrical engineering.
Quite.
No point in waving a willy when it's a very small one.
And since there's no way of verifying what anyone says on Usenet, there's absolutely no point in waving willies at all.
I see you've given up on that one then.
But you don't give either, so we needn't believe you.
In message , Tim Streater writes
He's a 'kin softie
what do you expect?
"I can simulate that on my computer ..." babble
I see that your years at University were wasted. Begging the question as well as ad hominem.
Again with the "we" already. You and the voices in your head must be having a great day.
How many years have you spent not learning how Usenet works and failing to understand the weakness of proof by assertion? I have grand children who can argue more cogently than you, although most mothers would expect a child of five to know arse from elbow, so they aren't necessarily exceptional.
"You seem to have forgotten that the title of this thread is: "OT The EU again". We are still waiting for you to actually contribute a single, useful, illuminating remark on that subject."
The world is still wait>
Java Jive wrote: [stupid quoting fixed, again]
You seem to imagine that you have been elected thread master and be labouring under the illusion that your opinion counts for something.
Here's a clue bozo, what does "OT" stand for?
Berating someone for being off topic inane off topic thread is mildly amusing; at least as a demonstration of the fact that you're one of those bizarre control freaks.
You seem to be suffering from over use of quotation marks.
The world is doing no such thing. I doubt that even you are doing so. Although the prospect of making you hold your breath for a day or two is entertaining.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.